Whether the Petitioner has presented a credible claim of actual innocence to warrant reversal of the offenses of carjacking, home-invasion-first-degree, robbery-unarmed, and criminal-sexual-conduct under the standards articulated in PERKINS-v-MCQUIGGINS 670-F3d-665 (6th-Cir-Mich-2012) on certiorari in MCQUIGGIN-v-PERKINS 133-SC-1924 (2013)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The United States Supreme Court distinguishes habeas petitions asserting claims of actual innocence as (a) cases where no constitutional error is alleged from petitions and (b) cases where a constitutional error allegedly occurred. The petitioner in the latter scenario argues that his innocence entitles him to habeas relief and entitled him to have a federal court consider the merits of his innocence. In cases like that, a credible claim of actual innocence only operates as a gateway through which a petitioner may pass and obtain federal review of his claims. Accordingly, where a petitioner's claim of actual innocence is for the purpose of having the court determine whether the constitutional errors alleged in the habeas petition warrant relief, the petitioner is required to meet a less stringent standard than in cases where the petitioner seeks habeas relief solely on the basis of his claimed innocence. The question before this court is whether the Petitioner has presented a credible claim of actual innocence to warrant reversal of the offenses of carjacking, home invasion first degree, robbery unarmed, and criminal sexual conduct under the standards articulated in PERKINS v MCQ UIGGINS 670 F3d 665 (6th Cir Mich 2012) on certiorari in MCQUIGGIN v PEKINS 133 SC 1924 (2013). 1