Document Type
Brief
Publication Date
4-20-2005
Abstract
This amicus curiae brief is submitted on behalf of Professors of Evidence Law at various United States Law Schools. Petitioner Bobby Lee Holmes and Respondent the State of South Carolina have consented to the filing of this brief.
Amici are professors of law with a particular interest in the application of state and federal rules of evidence. Their qualifications are set forth in the Appendix.
Petitioner was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. He proffered an abundance of evidence pointing to the guilt of another man, nearly all of which the trial court excluded. The South Carolina Supreme Court upheld the trial court's decision based on the state's applicable third-party evidence rule. The decision of the South Carolina Supreme Court cannot be squared with this Court's decision in Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. 284 (1973), which the South Carolina Supreme Court simply ignored. The Court should grant certiorari not only to correct the decision below, but more importantly, in order to clarify the status and scope of Chambers. Subsequent decisions of the Court have treated Chambers as establishing a generally applicable rule of law and as a sui generis exercise in error correction. Such mixed signals have left the lower courts without the guidance they need in order to evaluate the constitutionality of state evidentiary rules governing the admissibility of evidence of third-party guilt and to apply those rules in a manner consistent with the Constitution.
Recommended Citation
Gross, Samuel R., "Holmes v. South Carolina: Brief Amicus Curiae of Certain Professors of Evidence Law in Support of Petitioner" (2005). Appellate Briefs. 16.
https://repository.law.umich.edu/briefs/16
Comments
Amicus: Brodin, Professor Mark; Goldsmith, Professor Michael; Gross, Professor Samuel; Rossi, Professor Faust; Tillers, Professor Peter