This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to John H. Blume (Petitioner), according to John H. Blume (Petitioner), the case concerns the admissibility of third‑party guilt evidence when the prosecution has presented strong forensic evidence.
According to John H. Blume (Petitioner), according to John H. Blume (Petitioner), the South Carolina Supreme Court previously limited a defendant’s ability to create reasonable doubt by presenting third‑party guilt evidence, first in State v. Gay (2001) and now in this case.
According to Mr. Blume, other states allow third‑party guilt evidence if it creates a reasonable inference of innocence.
According to Mr. Blume, even when the State’s case is strong, the jury should be allowed to consider alibi witnesses.
Background and question before the Court
What each side argues
Petitioner (Bobby Lee Holmes)
According to Mr. Blume, third‑party guilt evidence should be admissible if it creates a reasonable inference of innocence.
According to Mr. Blume, even when the State’s case is strong, the jury should be allowed to consider alibi witnesses.
According to Mr. Blume, the DNA evidence may be harmless and therefore should not be excluded.
According to Mr. Blume, the trial judge found sufficient evidence that the victim was in the area at the relevant time.
According to Mr. Blume, the jury’s determination should be respected.
Respondent (South Carolina)
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
What happened at oral argument
Justice Stevens asked whether the petitioner argues that third‑party evidence must meet proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Chief Justice Roberts asked if the case hinges on a challenge to the DNA evidence.
According to Chief Justice Roberts, chief Justice Roberts inquired whether the DNA error would be harmless and therefore not affect the jury’s decision.
Justice Scalia asked if anyone else had examined the evidence on both sides.
The case was submitted.
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 664315d59cadd6e1415a-r1-2494e2ba9e268c93.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 21, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.