Click v. Alabama
Headline: Orders Alabama court to reconsider an inmate’s life-without-parole claim under a new Supreme Court rule, vacating the lower judgment and sending the case back for further review.
Holding: The Court granted review, vacated the Alabama court’s judgment, and remanded the case for reconsideration under Montgomery without deciding entitlement to relief.
- Sends Alabama inmate’s case back for reconsideration under Montgomery.
- Allows indigent petitioner to proceed without filing fees.
- Does not decide whether the petitioner gets retroactive relief.
Summary
Background
The case comes from the Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama and involves a person challenging a life-without-parole sentence. The Court granted the person’s motion to proceed without paying fees and agreed to review the case. The Supreme Court vacated the lower court’s judgment and sent the case back for reconsideration in light of the Court’s recent decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana.
Reasoning
The central question for the lower court on remand is whether the earlier Supreme Court decision in Montgomery requires the person to receive retroactive relief. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the challenger is entitled to relief on the merits. Instead, the Court held the petition pending Montgomery and then vacated and remanded so the Alabama court can reconsider the matter under that ruling.
Real world impact
The immediate practical effect is procedural: the Alabama court must reexamine the case with Montgomery’s guidance. This decision does not itself change the sentence or award relief; the final outcome depends on what the state court decides on reconsideration. The opinion notes that many similar cases were held pending Montgomery, so this order follows that broader pause and sends individual cases back to state courts for further review.
Dissents or concurrances
Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Alito, agreed only with sending the case back and warned that the Court’s action does not indicate any view about entitlement to relief, waiver, state-law bars, or whether the sentence is truly mandatory life without parole.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?