Skip to content

Hicks v. Frame

Pending petition

Docket No. Op. BelowArgument Opinion Vote Author Term
25-726 4th Cir. TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

Issue: Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1)(B)(ii)’s exception to the exhaustion requirement for “circumstances” that render state proceedings “ineffective” can apply when a state court reanimates inordinately delayed proceedings after a petitioner files in federal court.

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
11/17/2025Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 20, 2026)
12/26/2025Waiver of right of respondent Jonathan Frame to respond filed.
12/30/2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/16/2026.
01/07/2026Response Requested. (Due February 6, 2026)
01/08/2026Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 6, 2026 to March 6, 2026, submitted to The Clerk.
01/12/2026Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 6, 2026.
02/06/2026Brief amici curiae of Innocence Network, et al. filed.
03/06/2026Brief of respondent Jonathan Frame in opposition filed.
03/25/2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/17/2026.
03/25/2026Letter of March 25, 2026 from counsel for respondent filed. (Distributed)
03/25/2026Reply of petitioner Alan Lane Hicks filed. (Distributed)
03/31/2026Letter of March 31, 2026 from counsel for petitioner filed. (Distributed)