States free to broaden retroactivity standards for criminal case decisions
In Danforth v. Minnesota, the U.S. Supreme Court held 7-2 that states may choose to apply the benefits of a U.S. Supreme Court criminal law decision retroactively, even if the Supreme Court ruled the decision to not be retroactive. While the federal standard for determining retroactivity, as set forth in Teague v. Lane, will apply in federal habeas matters, states are free to develop their own broader standards for determining whether a decision applies retroactively in state post-conviction proceedings. Roberts and Kennedy dissented, arguing that the decision will result in a lack of uniformity in application of federal law.
