The Supreme Court reinstated the murder conviction of Pedro Hernandez in the infamous 1979 disappearance of 6-year-old Etan Patz, handing New York prosecutors a major win in one of the nation’s most haunting missing-child cases.
The justices ruled 6-3 to grant an appeal from prosecutors who asked the high court to undo a federal appeals court decision that had overturned Hernandez’s conviction.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson “would deny the petition for a writ of certiorari,” the decision noted.
The ruling means Hernandez, 64, will remain convicted in the case that terrified New York City parents and helped change how America responded to missing children.
Etan vanished May 25, 1979, while walking to his school bus stop in downtown Manhattan.
He was among the first missing children ever featured on milk cartons, and the anniversary of his disappearance later became National Missing Children’s Day.
Hernandez, who worked at a nearby convenience store at the time, did not become a suspect until 2012.
He later admitted to the crime during police questioning, though his lawyers have argued he falsely confessed because of mental illness that sometimes caused hallucinations.
Defense attorneys also emphasized that police questioned Hernandez for about seven hours before reading him his rights and recording the interview.
🚨 The Supreme Court reinstated a New York man’s murder conviction, holding that federal habeas courts cannot overturn state convictions based on legal rules the Supreme Court has never clearly established.
Justices Sotomayor dissents, joined by Kagan and Jackson. pic.twitter.com/Qo0MKApZry
— SCOTUS Wire (@scotus_wire) June 22, 2026
Hernandez then repeated his confession on tape at least twice.
His first trial ended in a mistrial in 2015 after jurors deadlocked.
A second jury convicted him in 2017 of murder and kidnapping, and he was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison.
But a unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit later overturned the conviction because of how the trial judge answered a question from jurors during deliberations.
The jurors had asked whether, if they found Hernandez’s pre-Miranda confession was not voluntary, they had to disregard his other confessions as well.
The judge answered simply, “the answer is no.”
The appeals court said jurors should have received a fuller explanation, including the possibility of discounting all of the confessions.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg criticized that reasoning, calling the basis for throwing out the conviction “a slender reed” that overlooked a five-month trial with 66 witnesses.
The Supreme Court agreed with prosecutors in an unsigned opinion, saying the federal appeals court went too far by second-guessing the state court conviction.
“The Second Circuit exceeded its authority in holding that Hernandez is entitled to relief,” the court wrote, referring to the New York-based appeals court.
The justices said federal courts must show more deference to state courts under a 1996 federal law intended to reduce federal oversight of state criminal trials.
Prosecutors had been preparing to try Hernandez for a third time before the Supreme Court stepped in.
The decision closes off, at least for now, a major legal detour in a case that has stretched across nearly five decades.
For Etan’s family and New York prosecutors, the ruling restores a hard-won conviction in a case that became a national symbol of childhood vulnerability, parental fear and the long search for justice.
Download the FREE Trending Politics App to get the latest news FIRST >>
