Schlup v. Delo
- Decided
- January 23, 1995
- Docket
- 93-7901
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 7,671 timesSuperseded by statute (verified)Possible negative treatment: superseded by statute (3 of 6 verified; none is a verified overruling) · Garcia v. United States
What later courts said
- holding that for habeas court to consider procedurally barred constitutional claims, petitioner must present “new reliable evidence” of actual innocence — Rozzelle v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (2012)
- holding that “the court may consider how the timing of the submission and the likely credibility of the affiants bear on the probable reliability of that evidence” — Eric Blackmon v. Tarry Williams (2016)
- holding that a habeas petitioner must show by clear and convincing evidence that, but for a constitutional error, no reasonable juror would have found the petitioner eligible for the death penalty — Ex Parte Brooks (2007)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*301] Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of the Court.
Petitioner Lloyd E. Schlup, Jr., a Missouri prisoner currently under a sentence of death, filed a second federal habeas corpus petition alleging that constitutional error deprived the jury of critical evidence that would have established his innocence. The District Court, without conducting an evidentiary hearing, declined to reach the merits of the petition, holding that petitioner could not satisfy the threshold showing of “actual innocence” required by Sawyer v. Whitley, 505 U. S. 333 (1992). Under Sawyer, the petitioner must show “by clear and convincing evidence that, but for a constitutional error, no reasonable juror would have found the petitioner” guilty. Id., at 336. The Court of Appeals affirmed. We granted certiorari to consider whether the Sawyer standard provides adequate protection against the kind of miscarriage of justice that would result from the execution of a person who is actually innocent.
I
Statutes cited
Cite this
Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.