Supreme Court of the United States
Harbison v. Bell
This writing
- Type
- Concurrence
- Filed
- April 1, 2009
- Case
- Harbison v. Bell
- Case status
- Decided
Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.
Opening text
The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.
Justice Thomas, concurring in the judgment. I agree that under 28 U. S. C. § 2253(c)(1)(A), a certificate of appealability was not required to seek appellate review of the issue in this case. See ante, at 183; see also post, at 200 (Scalia, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). I further agree with the Court that 18 U. S. C. §§ 3599(a)(2) and (e) entitle eligible state postconvic…
Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.
Other writings in this case
| Type | Author | Filed |
|---|---|---|
| Opinion | Not attributed | April 1, 2009 |
| Opinion of the Court | Not attributed | April 1, 2009 |