In House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (2006) the Supreme Court addressed a challenge to whether new DNA evidence could be considered in a capital case after a conviction. To be allowed to admit post conviction evidence, the petitioner must show that no reasonable person would have found him guilty in light of the new evidence. This case must be included in any pathfinder because it outlines the law on post conviction appeals based on allegations that newly discovered evidence establishes that the petitioner is not guilty.
No comments:
Post a Comment