Brief Bank

Below are amicus briefs either filed by the Innocence Network, or by individual Network project members, on issues that have been endorsed by the Innocence Network Board of Directors.

Issue: Actual Innocence

Holmes v. South Carolina (2005)

Counsel: Innocence Project
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Number:
Position: - Challenging evidentiary rule that excluded evidence of third party guilt that directly undermines the strength of the prosecution's evidence against the defendant. Issues: Actual Innocence
Issues: Actual Innocence

Holmes, Bobbie Lee v. South Carolina (2005)

Counsel: 2005
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Number: 04-1327
Position: - Urging Court to grant cert. petition to permit defendant to present evidence of third party guilt, despite what the state courts believed guilt was "overwhelming." Issues: Actual Innocence
Issues: Actual Innocence

Hunt, Lee Wayne, State of North Carolina v. (2007)

Counsel: NC Center on Actual Innocence, the Darryl Hunt
Court: North Carolina Court of Appeals
Case Number:
Position: - The attorney-client privilege should not prevent an attorney from revealing, once his or her client has died, that the client told counsel that he alone committed a crime for which another person was wrongly convicted.
Issues: Actual Innocence

Lambert, Lisa M. v. Charlotte Blackwell et al (1998)

Counsel: National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Innocence Project, Centurion Ministries, and National Legal Aid & Defender Assn.
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Number:
Position: - Urging court to grant certiorari and arguing that, in a habeas petition, actual Innocence is a basis for excusing procedural default. - Relevant exculpatory DNA evidence can satisfy the Schlup v. Delo actual Innocence gateway standard for permitting habeas review of otherwise procedurally defaulted claims.
Issues: Actual Innocence

Lott, Gregory, In re (2005)

Counsel: Innocence Network (by Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP)
Court: Sixth Circuit
Case Number: 05-3532
Position: - A claim of actual Innocence in habeas proceedings cannot be deemed a waiver of the attorney/client and work product privileges.
Issues: Actual Innocence

Souliotes, George A. v. Anthony Hedgpeth (2009)

Counsel: Innocence Network & Bob Barr (by Cooley Godward Kronish)
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 08-15943
Position: - Courts have authority to consider new evidence of actual Innocence without regard to the statutory one-year limitation period for newly discovered evidence, and that the standard for granting a new trial based upon newly discovered evidence should not be a strict "outcome-determinative" test, at least where the state relied at trial upon facts that turned out to be false. - Statutes of limitations, limiting the time in which a prisoner can seek a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, cannot limit courts' ability to consider new evidence of actual Innocence.
Issues: New Evidence of Innocence Actual Innocence

Van Buskirk, Mark Steven v. Baldwin (2001)

Counsel: Northern Cal. Innocence Project (by Morrison & Foerster)
Court: 9th Circuit
Case Number: 00-35640
Position: - Imposing a "due diligence" requirement on a defendant's actual Innocence claim is impermissible when actual Innocence is raised as a gateway claim for federal habeas relief under Schlup v. Delo.
Issues: Actual Innocence