People v. Hobley

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a freestanding claim of actual innocence exists only where the newly discovered evidence relied on is not also used to support a constitutional trial error claim
• holding capital defendant was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his claim supported by four juror affidavits alleging jurors were intimidated by nonjurors at the hotel where they were sequestered
• finding that evidence cannot support both a freestanding claim of actual innocence as well as a claim of another constitutional deprivation
• finding that res judicata applies to Brady claims in postconviction proceedings unless the information upon which they are based was discovered after trial and not made part of the record on direct appeal
• finding no ineffectiveness where counsel decided not to seek suppression of a lineup identification but instead opted to present evidence of police misconduct during the identification and witness uncertainty to the jury
• defining a claim of actual innocence as freestanding where “the newly discovered evidence being relied upon “is not being used to supplement an assertion of a constitutional violation with respect to [the] trial” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).