Coleman v. Thompson

Background

Roger Coleman is a man sentenced to death in a murder case that began 11 years earlier. This application represents the 12th round of judicial review. Coleman has had 11 years to produce evidence that he did not commit the crime. The District Court concluded his newest materials did not even make a “colorable showing of ‘actual innocence,’” and Coleman sought a pause of the execution from the Chief Justice and then the full Court.

Reasoning

The key question was whether Coleman’s new evidence showed substantial proof that he may be innocent and therefore justified delaying the execution for a full hearing. The Court deferred to the District Court’s factual finding and said there was no basis to conclude Coleman had produced “substantial evidence that he may be innocent.” The opinion notes Coleman focused much on challenging a post‑trial genetic analysis that had been done after trial at his request and under state court supervision. The Court contrasted this case with another petitioner, Herrera, where a lower court had found the evidence warranted more inquiry; here the District Court rejected Coleman’s claim on the merits.

Real world impact

The Court denied the stay, which allows the Commonwealth of Virginia to proceed without a new federal hearing while this application is resolved. The opinion signals that, at least in this case, long-running postconviction claims will not halt an execution unless the evidence meets the high showing described by the District Court. The Court’s action came while a similar innocence claim (Herrera) is scheduled for argument next Term.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Stevens agreed with denying a stay and would also deny review, while Justice Blackmun dissented, saying Coleman had produced substantial evidence of possible innocence and would have stayed the execution; Justice Souter would grant the stay.