The Ultimate Injustice: When a Court Misstates the Facts

32 Pages Posted: 10 Aug 2010

Date Written: 1990


This essay deals with what “the law” did to Dr. Branion, an American citizen, after the jury convicted him of murder in 1968. Under the American legal system, a defendant is entitled to have his case reviewed by a higher court, and, under certain circumstances, if the appellate review is unsuccessful, to present a petition for habeas corpus to a state or federal court. I will focus primarily on the stage of his litigation with which I am most familiar: his pursuit of a habeas remedy in federal court between 1986 and 1989. I will try to explain how one federal judge after another, using reasons wholly inconsistent inter se, managed to affirm the conviction of a provably innocent man.

Keywords: Miscarriage of Justice, Habeas Remedy, Appellate Review, Deconstruction and Justice, Legal Indeterminacy, Judicial Misrepresentation, Legal Deconstruction

JEL Classification: K10, K30, K40

Suggested Citation

D'Amato, Anthony, The Ultimate Injustice: When a Court Misstates the Facts (1990). Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 11, p. 1313, 1990, Northwestern Public Law Research Paper No. 10-31, Available at SSRN:

Anthony D'Amato (Contact Author)

Northwestern University - Pritzker School of Law ( email )

375 E. Chicago Ave
Chicago, IL 60611
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics