The Robert Knickerbocker case involves a Michigan man who has been in prison since 1991 for the strangling of Joe Melton in Wayne County, and whose most recent push for a new trial — built on DNA testing that excluded him and a reported confession by his acquitted codefendant — was turned away by every court that reviewed it, ending with the U.S. Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari on February 23, 2026.1Supreme Court of the United States. Docket, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340 He is serving life without parole at the Thumb Correctional Facility in Lapeer, Michigan.
The 1991 Conviction
Prosecutors said Knickerbocker and codefendant Larry Hardyniec lured Joe Melton under the pretense of a marijuana deal and robbed him. Melton was strangled with a wire, and the medical examiner found a post-mortem cut to his neck.2Casemine. People v. Knickerbocker
The two men were tried together in the Third Circuit Court for Wayne County in 1991, but before separate juries. Knickerbocker’s jury convicted him of first-degree felony murder and armed robbery. Hardyniec’s jury, hearing the same case, acquitted him of murder.3Supreme Court of the United States. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340 On May 3, 1991, Knickerbocker received a mandatory life sentence for the murder. A 50-to-90-year armed robbery sentence was later vacated on double jeopardy grounds.2Casemine. People v. Knickerbocker
DNA Testing on the Victim’s Fingernail Clippings
Thirty years after the trial, privately retained experts tested fingernail clippings taken from Melton’s right hand during the 1990 autopsy. At trial, a Michigan State Police examiner had testified that nothing of evidentiary value was found on those clippings.3Supreme Court of the United States. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340
In November 2021, forensic scientist Caitlin Hoey of Independent Forensics reported DNA from two contributors: Melton as the major contributor and an unknown minor contributor. The quantity of DNA from the minor contributor was too small to compare against known standards. In a January 2022 letter, a second consultant, Alan Friedman, wrote that applying a lower identification threshold allowed him to exclude Knickerbocker as the minor contributor.4Supreme Court of the United States. Appendix, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340
The Codefendant’s Reported Confession
In 2021, Brian Stock signed an affidavit describing what Knickerbocker’s cert petition called the “fifth” confession by Hardyniec. According to Stock, Hardyniec said he had robbed and killed Melton and that Knickerbocker knew nothing about the plan.3Supreme Court of the United States. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340 Because Hardyniec had already been acquitted by his own jury in 1991, he faced no criminal exposure from the admission.
Why the 2024 Motion Was Denied
Knickerbocker filed a successive motion for relief from judgment in Wayne County Circuit Court, combining the DNA findings and Stock’s affidavit. Judge Nicholas J. Hathaway held an evidentiary hearing on May 24, 2024, with testimony from three DNA experts.3Supreme Court of the United States. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340
On June 24, 2024, Judge Hathaway denied the motion. He cited a “strong possibility” that the fingernail clippings had been contaminated during the 31 years between the autopsy and the retesting, and noted that biological material could have ended up under Melton’s fingernails through ordinary contact before the murder. He declined to order a comparison of Hardyniec’s DNA against the clippings and declined to grant relief based on the Stock affidavit.4Supreme Court of the United States. Appendix, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340
Knickerbocker alleged in later filings that the government attorney introduced 19 factual assertions he called “erroneous and/or fictional,” covering trial evidence, Hardyniec’s prior confessions, and claims about contamination, and that the trial court’s opinion adopted them.3Supreme Court of the United States. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340
Appeals Through the State Courts and the Supreme Court
The Michigan Court of Appeals denied leave to appeal on April 28, 2025. The Michigan Supreme Court denied leave on September 26, 2025. Neither court issued a written opinion.3Supreme Court of the United States. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340
Knickerbocker then filed a pro se petition for a writ of certiorari, docketed as No. 25-6340. He argued the state court failed to apply the actual-innocence standard from Schlup v. Delo (1995), which asks whether, with the new evidence, “it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him.” He also raised prosecutorial misconduct and Fourteenth Amendment due process claims under Donnelly v. DeChristoforo and Dye v. Hofbauer.3Supreme Court of the United States. Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340 The Supreme Court denied the petition without comment on February 23, 2026.1Supreme Court of the United States. Docket, Knickerbocker v. Michigan, No. 25-6340
Where the Case Stands
Knickerbocker has exhausted the state and federal appellate options tied to his 2024 post-conviction motion. No innocence organization is known to have taken up the case; the Supreme Court petition was filed without counsel. The core tension remains unresolved on the record: DNA from the victim’s fingernails includes a minor contributor one expert says is not Knickerbocker, the man a separate jury acquitted has reportedly confessed on multiple occasions, and no court has found either piece of evidence sufficient to disturb the 1991 verdict.