⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Eleventh Circuit hears Melvin Hodges's challenge to his capital murder conviction and death sentence. Hodges was convicted of murdering Beth Seaton during a robbery. A van was used to kill her, and the evidence placing Hodges behind its wheel is one part of the dispute. A co-defendant testified against him under a plea agreement, and cigarette-butt DNA evidence was used to connect him to the driver's side. The jury recommended life without parole by eight votes to four. The trial judge instead imposed a death sentence. After state-court review, Hodges sought federal habeas relief, asking a federal court to overturn his conviction or sentence on constitutional grounds. The district court denied relief, and he is appealing. His lawyer will argue that the denial of expert funding and an inadequate investigation left critical evidence about his childhood abuse and mental condition out of the sentencing case. She will also challenge trial counsel's failure to object when the prosecutor mixed up exhibit numbers for cigarette butts from opposite sides of the van. Alabama's lawyer will argue that the requests did not establish a constitutional right to expert assistance, that counsel investigated reasonably, and that the alleged errors did not justify relief. He will also urge the court to weigh the evidence of guilt when deciding whether to grant this extraordinary remedy. Listen for the distinction between a fair defense at trial, a reliable sentencing decision, and the separate limits on federal review of a state judgment.

Melvin Gene Hodges v. Commissioner, Alabama Department of Corrections (No. 25-10137) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued November 4, 2026.