1. Whether a petitioner's claim in a federal habeas case that it is logically impossible that they committed an element of the offense—even when no new evidence is offered—is an actual innocence claim reviewed under the less stringent equitable analysis articulated by this Court in Schlup v. Delo and not subject to the more stringent test governing legal sufficiency of the evidence claims.

Whether a petitioner's claim in a federal habeas case that it is logically impossible that they committed an element of the offense is an actual innocence claim