No. 25-5095
Patrick D. Reed v. George A. Fredrick, Warden
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: circuit-split confrontation-clause criminal-procedure due-process habeas-corpus out-of-court-statements
Latest Conference:
2025-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether, as three circuits hold in conflict with the Sixth Circuit, clearly established law prohibits an officer's testimony about an absent declarant's expressly incriminating statements for the asserted reason of providing background context about an investigation.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether, as three circuits hold in conflict with the Sixth Circuit, clearly established law prohibits an officer's testimony about an absent declarant's expressly incriminating statements for the asserted reason of providing background context about an investigation
Docket Entries
2025-10-06
Petition DENIED.
2025-07-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-07-25
Waiver of Warden Fredrick of right to respond submitted.
2025-07-25
Waiver of right of respondent Warden Fredrick to respond filed.
2025-07-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 13, 2025)
Attorneys
Patrick Reed
Aaron Matthew Smith — Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Petitioner
Warden Fredrick
Mathura Jaya Sridharan — Ohio Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Thomas Elliot Gaiser — Office of the Ohio Attorney General, Respondent