High court reverses death row ruling

WASHINGTON – Jeffrey Landrigan, a man convicted of murder whose violent past put him on Arizona’s death row 17 years ago, is the latest illustration of the conflicted relationship between the Supreme Court and the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

On Monday, a closely divided Supreme Court rejected Landrigan’s claim that he was poorly served by his original defense attorney. The high court’s 5-4 decision reversed the 9th Circuit’s conclusion that Landrigan might have a case.

“The court of appeals overlooked Landrigan’s final statement to the sentencing court: ‘I think if you want to give me the death penalty, just bring it right on,’ ” Justice Clarence Thomas noted in his majority opinion.

The court’s decision in Schriro v. Landrigan makes it harder for prisoners to file appeals, and it gives lower courts more discretion in decision-making. In Landrigan’s case, a federal judge initially decided Landrigan couldn’t support his claim that he had a bad lawyer.

A three-member appellate panel agreed with the judge. Then, the entire 9th Circuit changed course and ruled that Landrigan could challenge the death sentence. California, Texas and 25 other states had urged the Supreme Court to reject Landrigan’s plea, warning they would otherwise face too much second-guessing.

The decision Monday was the sixth time out of eight decided cases this term that the Supreme Court has reversed the 9th Circuit, the nation’s largest.