The caption
The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
State court of last resort · ST-VA-SC
Hicks v. Dir., Dep't of Corr.
No. 131945Supreme Court of Virginia
131945 Hicks v. Dir., Dep't of Corr. 02/26/2015 In a habeas corpus petition alleging that exculpatory material had been was suppressed, arguments below were not sufficient to alert the habeas court to a claim …
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.The activity
Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The source
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
131945 Hicks v. Dir., Dep't of Corr. 02/26/2015 In a habeas corpus petition alleging that exculpatory material had been was suppr…
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- February 26, 2015
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Official docket
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
Docket entry
131945 Hicks v. Dir., Dep't of Corr. 02/26/2015 In a habeas corpus petition alleging that exculpatory material had been was suppressed, arguments below were not sufficient to alert the habeas court to a claim that the tolling provisions of Code § 8.01-229(D) deferred the running of the period to file a habeas application, but in a claim under Brady v. Maryland failure to disclose exculpatory evidence qualifies as obstruction by a defendant preventing filing of a habeas action, making it error for the court below to conclude that the petition was untimely. On this record, which included the defendant's confession, the allegedly withheld evidence could not reasonably put the whole case in suc…
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
No official record has been found at this time. We are watching for updates.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed; 1 such entry was left out of this case. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
Documents and links