No. 22-569
Response RequestedRelisted (2)
Tags: actual-innocence clear-and-convincing-evidence constitutional-rights cruel-and-unusual-punishment due-process freestanding-actual-innocence habeas-corpus lincoln-v-cassady missouri post-conviction-relief
Latest Conference:
2023-04-14
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Is it cruel and unusual punishment and a substantive due process violation for an innocent man to remain in prison?
2. Is the claim of freestanding actual innocence a cognizable claim for petitioners sentenced to either incarceration or death under the United States Constitution when a state court has concluded, after taking testimony and hearing evidence at a post-conviction hearing, that no jury would convict the petitioner?
3. Is "clear and convincing evidence" the standard to meet a freestanding actual innocence claim?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does innocence matter?
Docket Entries
2023-04-17
Petition DENIED.
2023-03-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/14/2023.
2023-03-17
Reply of petitioner Christopher Dunn filed.
2023-03-08
Brief of respondent Missouri in opposition filed.
2023-02-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 8, 2023.
2023-02-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 6, 2023 to March 8, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-01-06
Response Requested. (Due February 6, 2023)
2022-12-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/13/2023.
2022-12-16
Petition for writ of habeas corpus filed.
Attorneys
Christopher Dunn
Justin Colin Bonus — Justin C Bonus Attorney at Law, Petitioner
Missouri
Andrew Jacob Crane — Missouri Attorney General's Office, Respondent
Eric Stephen Schmitt — Office of the Missouri Attorney General, Respondent