No. 25-1246October Term 2025Before Arguments
Richard Vasquez, Petitioner v. Eric Guerrero, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Case status
- Current stage
- Before Arguments
- Latest event
- Accepted by the Court
- Decision timing
- No window until argument is scheduled.
- What it's about
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Question presented
1. Does 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)(B)(i) impose a “reasonable attorney” or a “reasonable applicant” test for due diligence? If the former, are there exceptions to account for egregious misconduct by an applicant’s lawyer? 2. Would construing the AEDPA to bar merits review in a capital case of a substantial IAC claim, one not previously reviewed on the merits by any court, violate the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments? 3. When an applicant is unaware of the relevant facts when he files a first-in-time application for habeas relief, are later-filed Brady and Napue/Giglio claim “second or successive”? 4. Is a court reviewing a federal habeas application, as a matter of due process or otherwise, required to resolve disputes over authority to speak for the State? What level of deference is owed to the State’s position expressed by an authorized representative?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit / Accepted by the Court
- Area
Supreme Court case awaiting argument
Timing
Expected by late June 2026, if argued this term
The Court granted review but has not yet scheduled oral argument. Once argued, the median case reaches a decision in 94 days. Nearly all cases are decided by the end of the term in which they are argued.
Briefing
What it's about
Richard Vasquez asks the Supreme Court to review how AEDPA (a federal law that limits repeat federal court challenges by prisoners) applies when a prisoner says earlier lawyers missed key facts. He says the Fifth Circuit blocked full review of his claim that trial lawyers failed to investigate a fatal flaw in the most important evidence against him.
Argument
No argument is scheduled, and the Court has not said whether it will hear the case. The petition says the Fifth Circuit used a "reasonable attorney" view of diligence that blocked review of Vasquez's lawyer-failure claim, later claims about suppressed or false evidence, and a dispute over who may speak for the State.
Impact
The case could affect whether death-sentenced prisoners and other inmates can get federal review of serious claims that no court has yet fully examined. For example, it matters when key facts about flawed, suppressed, or false evidence come to light only after an initial filing.
What is the Supreme Court being asked to decide in Vasquez v. Guerrero?
The petition asks whether later federal claims should be judged by what a reasonable lawyer would have discovered. It also asks when later claims about suppressed or false evidence count as repeat petitions.
Who could be affected if the Court takes Richard Vasquez's case?
Death-sentenced prisoners and other inmates with serious claims first missed by lawyers could be affected. The case could decide whether any court gets to hear those claims.
What happens next in Richard Vasquez v. Guerrero?
The justices must decide whether to grant certiorari, which means agreeing to hear the case. No argument is scheduled, and no decision window is listed yet.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 23, 2026
- Method
- Methodology