Delbert W. Smith and Bruce M. Botelho v. John Doe I
538 U.S. 84 · Decided March 5, 2003 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Delbert W. Smith and Bruce M. Botelho v. John Doe I was decided on March 5, 2003 by a vote of 6–3. The Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Ex post facto (state)” in the Criminal Procedure area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 538 U.S. 84 · 123 S. Ct. 1140 · 155 L. Ed. 2d 164 · 2003 U.S. LEXIS 1949
- Docket number
- 01-729
- Decided
- March 5, 2003
- Argued
- November 13, 2002
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority opinion
- Anthony M. Kennedy
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Ex post facto (state)
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Legal provision
- Article I, Section 10 (state bill of attainder or ex post facto law)
- Type of law
- Constitution
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice David H. Souter | Special concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Stephen G. Breyer | Dissent |
Full case caption
Delbert W. Smith and Bruce M. Botelho v. John Doe I et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 2002-030, docket 2002-030-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Ex post facto (state)”
- Connecticut Department of Public Safety v. John Doe
- Marion Reynolds Stogner v. CaliforniaLaw held unconstitutional
- J. Wayne Garner v. Robert L. Jones
- Kenneth Lynce v. Hamilton MathisLaw held unconstitutional
- California Department of Corrections v. Jose Ramon Morales
- Collins v. YoungbloodAltered precedent
Cases on the same legal provision: Article I, Section 10 (state bill of attainder or ex post facto law)
- Mark Seling v. Andre Brigham Young
- Scott Leslie Carmell v. TexasLaw held unconstitutional
- Garner v. Board of Public Works of Los Angeles
Same Term, same area (Criminal Procedure)
- Richard E. Early v. William Packer
- Jeanne Woodford v. John Louis Visciotti
- Abu-Ali Abdur'rahman v. Ricky Bell
- David Allen Sattazahn v. Pennsylvania
- United States v. Francisco Jimenez Recio and Adrian Lopez-Meza
- Thomas Joe Miller-El v. Janie Cockrell
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error