Supreme Court just released its order list from last Friday's conference. Cert. was granted in five cases, but at this point I can't tell if any of them are habeas cases. And one might be a front-end case. I'll update later when I learn more.
But the biggest thing from the order list was the order denying cert. in Wong v. Smith -- one of the cases that had been relisted. Alito, Roberts and Scalia dissented from the cert. denial. Obviously, that's why it had been relisted. I had worried that it was going to be a summary reversal since the Court had ordered the record. I guess it just goes to show that these relist cases are impossible to predict.
I haven't yet made it through the dissent. It's short. I'll update, or add a separate post, after I have had a chance to make it through it.
UPDATE: Okay, no habeas cases. But there is a front-end case. It concerns Miranda in the context of an interrogation of a juvenile. And it does appear to incorporate some habeas law. This is how SCOTUSblog describes the case:
The Supreme Court, taking on a second case this Term on the rights of youths facing police questioning, agreed on Monday to decide whether a minor has a right to “Miranda” warnings before any questions may be asked. The new case focuses on whether a suspect’s age counts as a factor in determining when to warn a suspect about the right to silence and the right to a lawyer. . . .
In the new case, J.D.B. v. North Carolina (09-11121), the Court will be reviewing a North Carolina Supreme Court decision that courts are barred from considering age as a factor in the Miranda v. Arizona context. The state court ruled that this conclusion was dictated by the Supreme Court’s 2004 decision in Yarborough v. Alvorado.
UPDATE II: Here's a surprisingly non-inflammatory post from Crime and Consequences about the JDB case. It does a nice and succinct job of describing the case.