Bell v. Cone

Summary

The Court, per curiam, held that the Sixth Circuit improperly granted habeas relief on Cone's challenge to Tennessee's especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel aggravating circumstance. The Tennessee Supreme Court had applied its established narrowing construction, notwithstanding its failure expressly to cite that construction, and the construction satisfied constitutional requirements. Its decision therefore was not contrary to clearly established federal law under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). The Court reversed and remanded without deciding procedural default or the aggravator's facial validity. Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justices Souter and Breyer, concurred, emphasizing that the decision did not authorize presuming a merits adjudication of an issue that a state court left unaddressed.