⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Ninth Circuit hears David Bollinger's challenge to the handling of his federal habeas case. Bollinger received a death sentence in a Nevada murder case. He seeks federal review of whether his trial violated the Constitution. A central dispute concerns his trial judge, Whitehead. Bollinger alleges that prosecutors helped investigate Whitehead while the judge was hearing his case, creating an intolerable risk of bias. He also alleges that his first post-conviction lawyers had conflicting loyalties because their firm represented Whitehead. The federal district court denied habeas relief in twenty-fifteen. Bollinger later sought to reopen the case after a state-court hearing developed evidence concerning the judge. The federal court initially reopened proceedings, but later treated the new bias claim as a successive habeas petition, subject to strict federal restrictions. The appeal asks which claims the federal court may consider, including earlier allegations of ineffective trial counsel. Another issue is procedural default: whether failures to raise claims properly in state court bar federal consideration, and whether Bollinger has a legally sufficient excuse. Heather Fraley will begin for Bollinger, seeking reconsideration of the barriers to reviewing his claims.

David Bollinger v. William Gittere (No. 15-99007) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued October 13, 2026.