Murphy v. King, et al., No. 10-3845 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseThis case stemmed from defendant's convictions related to his harassment, terrorizing, and retaliation against a range of people in the criminal justice system. After defendant's conviction in state court, defendant moved for federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. 2254. The district court denied relief but granted a certificate of appealability on whether defendant's revocation sentence violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments. The court held that the district court did not err in holding that defendant's Eighth Amendment claim was procedurally defaulted where he failed to present the claim in his state court proceeding and failed to show cause for his failure to do so and that he had not demonstrated cause to excuse the default or miscarriage of justice. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court was affirmed.
Court Description: Prisoner case - habeas. Murphy's claim that his revocation sentence violated the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment was procedurally barred as he failed to present the claim in his state court proceeding and failed to show cause for his failure to do so; fundamental- miscarriage-of-justice exception did not apply as there is no authority for Murphy's position that escalating punishments for continued violations of supervision are a miscarriage of justice.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.