Schlup v. Delo

1995-01-23

Headline: Court requires a lower 'actual innocence' threshold for some death-row habeas petitions, replacing Sawyer with the Carrier standard and sending the case back for further fact-finding and review of barred claims.

Holding: The Court held that a death-row petitioner claiming actual innocence must show it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him, applying the Carrier standard rather than Sawyer and remanding for further proceedings.

Real World Impact:

Allows federal review of new evidence that could prove actual innocence.
Reduces the proof needed to overcome procedural bars in death-row cases.
Encourages evidentiary hearings when new, reliable evidence raises reasonable doubt.

Topics: death penalty, habeas review, actual innocence, new evidence, procedural bars

Summary

Background

On February 3, 1984, a prisoner named Arthur Dade was stabbed to death in a Missouri prison. Lloyd Schlup, a white inmate, was convicted after two corrections officers identified him as a participant, and a jury sentenced him to death. At trial a dining-room videotape showed Schlup arriving 65 seconds before guards ran out in response to a distress call; Schlup argued that timing and alibi witnesses showed he could not have been involved. Years later Schlup filed a second federal habeas corpus petition supported by new affidavits: inmates saying he was not present, John Green saying he called base shortly after the assault, and Lieutenant Faherty describing Schlup’s leisurely walk to lunch.

Reasoning

The District Court and the Eighth Circuit declined to hold a hearing and applied Sawyer’s strict “clear and convincing” standard for innocence. The Supreme Court rejected that approach for claims of innocence of the crime. Relying on earlier precedent (Carrier/Kuhlmann), the Court held that when a death-row petitioner raises actual innocence to overcome procedural bars, the petitioner must show it is more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him. The Court said federal habeas courts may consider all reliable new evidence and assess how reasonable jurors likely would react, and it sent the case back for further factfinding.

Real world impact

The ruling lowers the gateway burden for some prisoners seeking review of otherwise barred constitutional claims, allowing federal courts to consider new eyewitness affidavits, timing evidence, and other reliable material that could undermine confidence in a conviction. It instructs courts to weigh new evidence against trial evidence and to hold evidentiary hearings when appropriate. The decision remands Schlup’s case for further proceedings under the Carrier standard.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice O’Connor concurred to clarify the standard; several dissenters argued for applying Sawyer or for stricter statutory limits and warned of confusion over standards.