McCarthy v. Hernandez · ¶29

The panel stressed that its holding was based on the premise that the trial court had “misstate[d] or misappli[ed] . . . federal constitutional law in [the] jury instruction,” not on the premise that the trial court had “misstated state law.” Id., at 160, n. 9. Indeed, the panel acknowledged “[a]t the outset” that AEDPA does not empower federal courts to “ `reexamine state-court determinations on state-law questions.' ” Id., at 157 (quoting Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U. S. 62, 67–68 (1991)).

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.