CrimProf Blog

Editor: Kevin Cole
Univ. of San Diego School of Law

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

SCOTUS Oral Argument with Serious Implications for Innocent Inmates

From On the Docket at Northwestern University

House, Paul Gregory v. Bell, Ricky (warden)

Docket: 04-8990
Term: 05-06
Appealed From: 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (Oct. 6, 2004)
Oral Argument: 01-11-06

Opinion Issued:

Subject: Capital case, habeas corpus, innocence

Questions presented: (1) Did the majority below err in applying the Supreme Court's decision in Schlup v. Delo to hold that petitioner's compelling new evidence, though presenting at the very least a colorable claim of actual innocence, was as a matter of law insufficient to excuse his failure to present that evidence before the state courts - merely because he had failed to negate each and every item of circumstantial evidence that had been offered against him at the original trial? (2) What constitutes a "truly persuasive showing of actual innocence" pursuant to Herrera v. Collins sufficient to warrant freestanding habeas relief?

More here.  [Mark Godsey]

Exoneration Innocence Accuracy | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference SCOTUS Oral Argument with Serious Implications for Innocent Inmates:


Post a comment