Kemp Vs. Smith

Kemp vs Smith

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Aug-24-1983

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/105383

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/105383
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: Aug-24-1983
Case Number: 463 U.S. 1321
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kemp

Respondent

Smith

Excerpt

.....the court of appeals for the eleventh circuit -- reversing the district court -- granted a stay of execution. its brief opinion stated that substantial issues were raised in this habeas corpus proceeding that justified review of their merits. judge hill dissented. at about 10 a.m. today, the attorney general of georgia filed an application with me as circuit justice requesting that i dissolve and vacate this stay. a response to this application was received this afternoon in my chambers at about 3 o'clock. this is the fourth time that this capital case has required action by this court: once on direct appeal, once on state habeas corpus, once on federal habeas corpus, and now in smith's second federal habeas proceeding. apart from rehearings, this case has been reviewed 16 times by state and federal courts since smith's conviction in 1975. in these circumstances, and for the reasons stated by judge hill in his dissenting opinion below, it is not clear to me that the court of appeals is correct in thinking that substantial issues may remain for further consideration. but in the present posture of the case, the question before me as circuit justice is whether the court of appeals has page 462 u. s. 1322 abused its discretion in granting a temporary stay pending a hearing on the merits. i am not able so to conclude. it is apparent from the papers presented that the court of appeals heard arguments at some length yesterday afternoon. moreover, and quite properly, that court has provided for an expeditious hearing on the merits. accordingly, the application to vacate the stay ordered by the court of appeals is denied.

Full Judgment

Kemp v. Smith - 463 U.S. 1321 (1983)
U.S. Supreme Court Kemp v. Smith, 463 U.S. 1321 (1983)

Kemp v. Smith

No. A-133

Decided August 24, 1983

463 U.S. 1321

ON APPLICATION TO VACATE STAY

SYLLABUS

An application to vacate the Court of Appeals' stay of respondent's execution is denied. The papers presented do not show that the Court of Appeals abused its discretion in granting a stay pending a hearing on the merits in respondent's habeas corpus proceedings.

JUSTICE POWELL, Circuit Justice.

Respondent Smith, a convicted murderer, is scheduled to be executed by the State of Georgia at 8 a.m. tomorrow, Thursday, August 25.

At about 4:25 p.m. on August 23, the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit -- reversing the District Court -- granted a stay of execution. Its brief opinion stated that substantial issues were raised in this habeas corpus proceeding that justified review of their merits. Judge Hill dissented. At about 10 a.m. today, the Attorney General of Georgia filed an application with me as Circuit Justice requesting that I dissolve and vacate this stay. A response to this application was received this afternoon in my chambers at about 3 o'clock.

This is the fourth time that this capital case has required action by this Court: once on direct appeal, once on state habeas corpus, once on federal habeas corpus, and now in Smith's second federal habeas proceeding. Apart from rehearings, this case has been reviewed 16 times by state and federal courts since Smith's conviction in 1975. In these circumstances, and for the reasons stated by Judge Hill in his dissenting opinion below, it is not clear to me that the Court of Appeals is correct in thinking that substantial issues may remain for further consideration.

But in the present posture of the case, the question before me as Circuit Justice is whether the Court of Appeals has

Page 462 U. S. 1322

abused its discretion in granting a temporary stay pending a hearing on the merits. I am not able so to conclude. It is apparent from the papers presented that the Court of Appeals heard arguments at some length yesterday afternoon. Moreover, and quite properly, that court has provided for an expeditious hearing on the merits.

Accordingly, the application to vacate the stay ordered by the Court of Appeals is denied.

Same Court & Year US Supreme Court · 1983 Same Parties Kemp vs Smith Same Subject Education

Education Further consideration dissenting opinion attorney general court of appeals circuit justice district court federal courts