Abstract
This article conducts an empirical study of habeas cases involving Certificates of Appealability (COA) in the Fifth and Eleventh Circuit. Notably, the study provides critical insight into the standard being used to resolve and the reasons for denying these applications. Two trends emerge in the data that are arguably a product of AEDPA deference: the tendency for courts to interpret §§ 2254(d) and (e) as calling for merits analysis at the COA stage and the tendency for courts to issue brief COA orders that rely principally on deference to lower court findings. After identifying AEDPA deference at the COA stage as the main culprit of systematic COA denials, this article proposes a doctrinal shift that may achieve a more limited inquiry that encourages further review of constitutional claims.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
