Scot Gaither v. Tim Lane, Warden

This case presents the following questions for review:

1. To accept a waiver of counsel on direct appeal of a criminal case, must a state court at least obtain some evidence of a knowing waiver, as the state courts of Arizona, Georgia, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, and Texas have held or is a mere request to proceed pro se on appeal sufficient, as the Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Circuits have held?

2. Consistent with 28 U.S.C §2254(b)(1)(B)(i) which excuses exhaustion requirements when “there is an absence of available State corrective process,” and consistent with Williams (Michael) v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 420 (2000), and Shinn v. Ramirez, 596 U.S. 366 (2022), may a federal habeas petitioner develop the factual basis of a claim through an evidentiary hearing when the state court lacks a corrective procedure, or does §2254(e)(2)(A)’s “fails to develop” language prohibit it? -i-