No. 25-7649October Term 2025Petition Pending
Robert Ralph DiPietro, Petitioner v. Michael Nail, Commissioner, Georgia Department of Community Supervision
Robert Ralph DiPietro asks the Supreme Court to review lower-court rulings involving allegedly missing defense DNA-expert testimony from his trial record.
Case status
- Current stage
- Petition Pending
- Latest event
- Petition pending
- Decision timing
- No decision timeline until the Court agrees to hear the case.
- What it's about
Robert Ralph DiPietro asks the Supreme Court to review lower-court rulings involving allegedly missing defense DNA-expert testimony from his trial record. He argues that the omission undermined his direct appeal and that his appellate lawyer provided ineffective assistance by failing to preserve or report the missing testimony.
Question presented
1. Whether the lower courts erred in finding that the missing (lost or destroyed by the state) exculpatory trial evidence; the pro bono, expert DNA testimony about sperm and semen from DNA expert Dr. Greg Hampikian, with the Innocence Project— which refuted the State’s sole physical evidence in a rape and molestation case — was “irrelevant” to Petitioner’s conviction and direct appeal, thereby failing to address a meritorious Sixth Amendment claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel Brian Steel for losing his copy of the trial testimony, and failing to transmit the testimony and then his failure to notify the Georgia Court of Appeals about the fact there was MISSING DEFENSE EXPERT TRIAL EVIDENCE FROM THE TRIAL RECORD FOR THE DIRECT APPEAL that was not included, in the transmitted documents that THE APPELLLATE COUNSEL was responsible for sending for the Petitioner’s motion for new trial and all appeals. Where that testimony directly contradicted the State’s false forensic evidence of semen and sperm and was essential to rebutting the prosecutor’s theory that the molestation was a prelude to a rape for which Petitioner was acquitted? 2. Whether the lower courts applied a legally incorrect standard under Strickland v. Washington by evaluating a lost trial?
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit / Petition pending
- Area
Petition for review pending
Briefing
What it's about
Robert Ralph DiPietro asks the Supreme Court to review claims that defense DNA-expert testimony was missing from his trial record during his direct appeal. He says his appellate lawyer was ineffective for not preserving or reporting the missing testimony.
Argument
The case is pending, and oral argument has not yet been scheduled. DiPietro argues that missing DNA testimony refuted the state's physical evidence and that the lower courts used the wrong standard for evaluating his ineffective-assistance claim.
Impact
The case concerns whether a missing part of a trial record can undermine a defendant's appeal when it may have challenged key forensic evidence. It could affect defendants whose appeals rely on trial materials that were lost or not transmitted.
What is at stake in DiPietro v. Nail?
DiPietro says missing defense DNA testimony weakened his direct appeal and that his appellate lawyer failed to address the omission.
Who could be affected by the missing-trial-record issue?
Defendants appealing convictions could be affected when important trial materials are lost or omitted from documents sent to an appellate court.
What happens next in DiPietro v. Nail?
The Court may take action on the petition or make another scheduling move. Oral argument has not been scheduled.
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
- Sep 4, 2026
- Method
- Methodology


