Head-to-head
Richard Vasquez, Petitioner v. Eric Guerrero, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division vs. Terry Duane Qualls v. United States vs. Christopher J. Rahaim v. Bruce Bartlett, Individually and in His Official Capacity as State Attorney for the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida
Criminal Procedure cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
The matchup
Docket 25-1246Richard Vasquez, Petitioner v. Eric Guerrero, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions DivisionBefore argumentOctober Term 2025Docket 25-5620Terry Duane Qualls v. United StatesDismissedOctober Term 2025Docket 25-6155Christopher J. Rahaim v. Bruce Bartlett, Individually and in His Official Capacity as State Attorney for the Sixth Judicial Circuit of FloridaDismissedOctober Term 2025
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Criminal Procedure
- Why compared
- Reviewed Criminal Procedure tags connect these current-term public cases.
Questions presented
- Richard Vasquez, Petitioner v. Eric Guerrero, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division
- 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?
- Terry Duane Qualls v. United States
- Whether an appeal waiver applies when the sentencing judge advises the defendant that he has the right to appeal and the government does not object.
- Christopher J. Rahaim v. Bruce Bartlett, Individually and in His Official Capacity as State Attorney for the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida
- 1. Should the unsettled issue in Heck v. Humphrey and Spencer v. Kenma^where this court has not definitively ruled that criminal defendants may use a §1983 lawsuit for evidence suppression when the accused has exhausted all state remedies, a habeas petition is not an adequate remedy, and the accused has been irreparably injured by bad faith concealment of evidence needed to show fraud and unlawful arbitrary detention? 2. Do established laws protect and prevent the indefinite suppression of public records that show fraudulent prosecutions of non-existent crimes, impeachability of all prosecution witnesses, an insufficiency of evidence to sustain any conviction and the lack of any lawful authority by non-elected, appointed judges and prosecutors to perpetrate and conceal unconstitutional processes facilitating extrinsic fraud and false imprisonment? 3. Do established Federal and International laws enforce the right to a fair, speedy trial and correct the deprivation of that rig.?
Go deeper
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.