Kenneth Lynce v. Hamilton Mathis
519 U.S. 433 · Decided February 19, 1997 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
Kenneth Lynce v. Hamilton Mathis was decided on February 19, 1997 unanimously (9–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Ex post facto (state)” in the Criminal Procedure area. SCDB records that the Court declared a state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision unconstitutional.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 519 U.S. 433 · 117 S. Ct. 891 · 137 L. Ed. 2d 63 · 1997 U.S. LEXIS 1269
- Docket number
- 95-7452
- Decided
- February 19, 1997
- Argued
- November 4, 1996
- 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
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- John Paul Stevens
- 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
- Held unconstitutional
- A state or territorial law, regulation or constitutional provision
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Concurrence | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Majority | |
| Justice David H. Souter | Majority | |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg | Majority | |
| Justice Stephen G. Breyer | Majority |
Full case caption
Kenneth Lynce v. Hamilton Mathis, Superintendent, Tomoka Correctional Institution, et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1996-028, docket 1996-028-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Ex post facto (state)”
- California Department of Corrections v. Jose Ramon Morales
- J. Wayne Garner v. Robert L. Jones
- Connecticut Department of Public Safety v. John Doe
- Delbert W. Smith and Bruce M. Botelho v. John Doe I
- Marion Reynolds Stogner v. CaliforniaLaw held unconstitutional
- Collins v. YoungbloodAltered precedent
Cases on the same legal provision: Article I, Section 10 (state bill of attainder or ex post facto law)
- Scott Leslie Carmell v. TexasLaw held unconstitutional
- Mark Seling v. Andre Brigham Young
- Garner v. Board of Public Works of Los Angeles
Same Term, same area (Criminal Procedure)
- California v. Kenneth Duane Roy
- Ohio v. Robert D. Robinette
- United States v. Vernon Watts
- Johnny Lynn Old Chief v. United States
- Maryland v. Jerry Lee Wilson
- United States v. Jerry E. Wells and Kenneth R. Steele
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