WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from Texas death row prisoner Rodney Reed, rejecting his latest effort to obtain DNA testing that he argues could help prove his innocence, according to a March 23 report by The New York Times.
Reed, who was convicted in 1996 of the rape and murder of Stacey Stites in Bastrop County, has spent years seeking access to additional DNA testing on evidence collected in the case. His attorneys have argued that modern testing methods could provide new information about the crime.
The Supreme Court’s decision leaves in place lower court rulings that denied Reed’s request to test dozens of items, including the belt used in the killing. The majority of the justices did not provide an explanation for declining to take the case, which is standard in routine orders.
Three justices dissented from the decision, writing that the refusal to hear the appeal could allow the state to carry out an execution without determining whether Reed’s DNA is present on key evidence. The dissent noted that such testing could potentially clarify questions central to the case.
Reed was convicted after DNA evidence linked him to Stites. At trial, prosecutors argued that the DNA established his guilt. Reed initially denied knowing Stites but later said they had been in a consensual relationship and that another individual may have been responsible for the killing.
A jury rejected that defense and sentenced him to death.
Over the past decade, Reed’s case has drawn national attention, with support from lawmakers and public figures who have called for further review of the evidence. In 2019, a Texas appeals court halted his execution and sent the case back to a lower court for additional consideration.
Reed has sought DNA testing on approximately 40 pieces of evidence, arguing that advances in forensic technology could yield new results. However, a state trial judge denied the request, citing concerns about the chain of custody of the evidence and concluding that even favorable results would not likely have changed the outcome of the trial.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed that decision and later declined to reconsider the case.
Reed then filed a federal lawsuit seeking access to DNA testing, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that his claim was filed too late under a two-year statute of limitations. The court said Reed should have brought the claim within two years of the state court’s denial of testing.
In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Reed’s favor on a procedural issue, allowing him to pursue his claim in lower federal courts. That decision addressed only the timing of his filing and did not resolve whether he was entitled to DNA testing.
Monday’s order declining to hear his appeal effectively ends that avenue of relief at the Supreme Court level.
The case continues to raise questions about access to post-conviction DNA testing and the role of new forensic methods in reviewing older convictions.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
