Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Frederick M. Hill v. Angela Stuff, Warden
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 23-3929 · judgment May 30, 2024
Questions presented
-
Should the “one fair shot” and procedural due process require the court of appeals to notify a petitioner that an appeal and briefing schedule is being converted back to a COA, if an amended CO A could bring forth arguments for granting the COA?
-
If the trial record clearly shows on its face egregious violations of the Fourth and Sixth Amendments; and cause for procedural default, is there a debatable and substantial constitutional claim; or is it adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed for a COA to be granted? a. During a “knock and talk” criminal investigation when there is no answer at the first door of “public common use” does it allow police to play “Let’s Make a Deal” by knocking on doors numbers two and three? b. Whether a “knock and talk,” is a physical intrusion; and a Fourth Amendment violation when access is gained by a pathway that the public would not normally use? c. During a criminal investigative “knock and talk”, on a single, private, unregulated commercial building, is it entitled to the same Fourth Amendment protection as a house and its “curtilage”?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Frederick M. Hill
For respondent
Mathura Jaya Sridharan
Ohio Attorney General's Office
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Nov 24 2025Petition DENIED.
- Nov 06 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/21/2025.
- Nov 03 2025Waiver of right of respondent Kenneth Black, Warden to respond filed.
- Sep 29 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 14, 2025)