United States Fourth Circuit

Because the fourth category of Ex Post Facto Clause violations, described in Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. 386, 390 (1798), was not "clearly established" at the time of the state court's decision, the district court's grant of habeas relief based on an altered procedure for determining whether the fact of intoxication, if found, was mitigating, was erroneous.

Appellate Information

• Argued 01/23/2002
• Decided 03/25/2002
• Published 03/25/2002

Judges

• Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, and WILKINS and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Annabelle Louise Lisic, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Appeals Division, Office of the Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Respondents-Appellants.  David John Walsh-Little, Baltimore, Maryland;  Michael Alan Millemann, Baltimore, Maryland, for Respondents-Appellees.   ON BRIEF:  J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General of Maryland, Ann N. Bosse, Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Appeals Division, Office of the Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Respondents-Appellants.