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: New Evidence of Innocence

Armstrong, Ralph, State v. (2005)

Counsel: Wisconsin Innocence Project
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Case Number: 01-2789 and 02-2979
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

House v. Bell (2005)

Counsel: Innocence Project
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Number:
Position: - Relevant exculpatory DNA evidence can satisfy the Schlup v. Delo actual Innocence gateway standard for permitting habeas review of otherwise procedurally defaulted claims.
Issues: New Evidence of Innocence

Siller, Thomas v. State of Ohio (2008)

Counsel: Innocence Network
Court: Ohio Court of Appeals, Eighth Appellate District
Case Number: 08-90865
Position: - New trial should be granted where conviction rested on snitch testimony and fraudulent forensic science.
Issues: New Evidence of Innocence Unreliable Forensic Science

Slaughter, Jimmie Ray v. Mike Mullin (2005)

Counsel: Innocence Project
Court: Tenth Circuit
Case Number: 05-6049
Position: - Leave to file successor habeas petition should be granted based on new DNA evidence on hairs and on scientific research undermining ballistics evidence that was used at trial.
Issues: New Evidence of 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