'But I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For': The Supreme Court’s Struggle to Understand Factual Investigations in Federal Habeas Corpus

48 Pages Posted: 15 Aug 2015

See all articles by Tiffany Murphy

Tiffany Murphy

University of Arkansas - School of Law

Date Written: August 13, 2015

Abstract

The Supreme Court’s decision in McQuiggin v. Perkins found that a defendant’s actual innocence of his conviction may trump the 28 USC § 2244(d)(1)(D) one year statute of limitations for filing a habeas corpus petition. However, a federal court must take into account the delay in bringing the case when considering whether a miscarriage of justice occurred. In other words, the longer the delay after the one year trigger to bring the evidence to federal court, the less likely an inmate will be able to prove his innocence. The problem with application of a sliding scale is the Court’s failure to appreciate the difficulties in gathering the hard evidence necessary to establish actual innocence. For a pro se inmate, this task is near insurmountable because of the investigation needed to locate witnesses, find records, and obtain expert analysis of physical evidence required to substantiate an innocence claim. Even those agencies tasked with proving innocence take years to gather evidence that establishes innocence regardless of whether the case involves DNA testing.

What makes the Court’s reasoning on innocence issues more troubling is the leniency that is extended to a much broader range of constitutional violations. Inmates who argue a Sixth Amendment ineffective assistance of counsel claim may have an easier time obtaining relief than an innocent inmate, even though both face the same obstacles concerning factual evidence to support their arguments. The Court’s recent decisions for Martinez v. Ryan and Trevino v. Thaler, which permits raising improperly pled ineffective assistance of counsel claims either on direct appeal or state post-conviction, to satisfy the cause and prejudice standard for not bringing a viable claim of failure to investigate within the proper procedural mechanism. The Court’s disconnect in recognizing that the same difficulties exist between the innocent and the wider pool of inmates challenging convictions must be remedied to permit those wrongfully convicted an easier path to freedom.

Keywords: McQuiggin v. Perkins, habeas corpus, statute of limitations, innocence, Supreme Court, Martinez v. Ryan, Trevino v. Thaler

Suggested Citation

Murphy, Tiffany, 'But I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For': The Supreme Court’s Struggle to Understand Factual Investigations in Federal Habeas Corpus (August 13, 2015). University of Arkansas Research Paper No. 15-8. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2644022 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2644022

Tiffany Murphy (Contact Author)

University of Arkansas - School of Law ( email )

260 Waterman Hall
Fayetteville, AR 72701
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
35
Abstract Views
366
PlumX Metrics