This Comment examines the circumstances under which a state prisoner may challenge his or her conviction in a habeas proceeding when there has been procedural default at the trial level. The author argues that this is a hotly contested topic, since the Court's decision in Fay v. Noia, but that the Court, in Engle v. Isaac, has established a new strict burden for these prisoners. The author begins by exploring the arguments with respect to an expanded writ. The author then examines the case law that followed the decision in Fay, in which the cause and prejudice standard evolved, and then examines the Court's decision in Engle and its effect on the law of habeas corpus. The author argues that the Court's decision, which relies on outcome determinative concerns, has undermined the use and efficacy of the writ of habeas corpus.
"Fundamental Miscarriage of Justice": The Supreme Court's Version of the "Truly Needy" in Section 2254 Habeas Corpus Proceedings,
San Diego L. Rev.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol20/iss2/6