Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Terrill Smith v. United States
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 23-15637 · judgment January 8, 2026
Questions presented
-
Whether, after Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (2011), trial counsel still has a duty to investigate whether expert testimony could significantly bolster the defense regarding what is obviously a critical issue in a criminal case when it is clear the government will present specialized testimony on the issue.
-
Whether a defendant is prejudiced by the failure to investigate potential expert testimony about a critical issue in the case if a reasonable juror could decline to convict after hearing the expert testimony proffered in postconviction proceedings.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Mary Edith Cunningham
Federal Public Defender's Office
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Subject area
Criminal Procedure (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Linked docket
26A41
Order
Order list, October 13, 2026 · Certiorari denied
Proceedings
- Oct 13 2026Petition DENIED.
- Sep 24 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2026.
- Sep 22 2026Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Aug 28 2026Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 15, 2026)
- Jul 08 2026Application (26A41) granted by Justice Kagan extending the time to file until August 28, 2026.
- Jul 01 2026Application (26A41) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 14, 2026 to August 28, 2026, submitted to Justice Kagan.