## Facts

- Roger Keith Coleman was convicted in Virginia of rape and capital murder and sentenced to death.
- After his conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct review, Coleman pursued state habeas relief in a Virginia circuit court and asserted several federal constitutional claims not raised on direct appeal.
- The state habeas court rejected the claims after an evidentiary hearing and entered final judgment.
- Coleman filed a notice of appeal from the state habeas judgment 33 days after entry, missing Virginia’s 30-day deadline.
- The Virginia Supreme Court dismissed the appeal solely because the notice of appeal was untimely under the state rule.
- Coleman then filed a federal habeas petition raising, among other claims, the federal constitutional claims first raised in state habeas.
- The federal district court and the Fourth Circuit treated those claims as procedurally defaulted and denied relief because Coleman failed to show cause and prejudice.

## Issues

1. Whether dismissal of Coleman’s state habeas appeal as untimely constituted a procedural default resting on an independent and adequate state ground that barred federal habeas review.
2. Whether a “plain statement” requirement demanded a clearer indication that the state court relied on a state procedural ground when it dismissed the appeal.
3. Whether attorney error in state postconviction proceedings can constitute “cause” to excuse a procedural default in federal habeas.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the Fourth Circuit and denied federal habeas review of the defaulted claims.
- The Court held that the untimely notice of appeal was a state procedural default resting on an independent and adequate state ground.
- The Court held that the state court’s dismissal order sufficiently signaled reliance on a procedural ground where it granted a motion to dismiss based solely on timeliness.
- The Court held that attorney error in state collateral proceedings does not constitute “cause” because there is no constitutional right to counsel in such proceedings.
- The Court held Coleman did not satisfy the “fundamental miscarriage of justice” exception because he did not make the required showing of actual innocence.

## Legal Principles

- Federal habeas courts generally may not review federal constitutional claims rejected by a state court on a state procedural ground that is independent of federal law and adequate to support the judgment.
- A state procedural rule is “adequate” when it is firmly established and regularly followed; it is “independent” when its application does not depend on resolving a federal question.
- A procedural default may be excused only by showing (a) cause for the default and actual prejudice, or (b) that failure to consider the claim will result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice (actual innocence).
- The “plain statement” approach does not require extended explanation when a state court grants a motion to dismiss that rests solely on a procedural defect.
- Because there is no constitutional right to counsel in state postconviction proceedings, attorney negligence or ineffectiveness at that stage is attributed to the client and does not supply “cause” to excuse default.

## Conclusion

Coleman held that a state court’s dismissal of a postconviction appeal as untimely constitutes an independent and adequate state procedural ground barring federal habeas review absent cause and prejudice or a showing of actual innocence, and that attorney error in state collateral proceedings does not establish cause.


Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722 (1991)