No. 19-8483

Walter Barton v. William Stange, Warden

Lower Court: Eighth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-05-18
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: actual-innocence actual-innocence-evidence circuit-split competency-to-be-executed due-process evidence-standard execution-competence habeas-corpus judicial-interpretation schlup-standard schlup-v-delo
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: N/A
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does new evidence of actual innocence require that it was not available at trial or not presented to the jury?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Question One Does new evidence of actual innocence, discussed in Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 327 (1995), require that it was not available at trial, as interpreted by the Eighth Circuit, or that it was not presented to the jury, as interpreted by the Second, Seventh, Fourth, Sixth and Ninth Circuits? Question Two Has the Missouri Supreme Court, and now the Eighth Circuit Panel, unreasonably interpreted standards pronounced by this Court for determination of execution competence, employed the wrong standard, and thereby found an incompetent man to be competent. i

Docket Entries

2020-05-19
Reply of Walter Barton filed.
2020-05-19
Application (19A1040) referred to the Court.
2020-05-19
Application (19A1040) denied by the Court.
2020-05-19
Petition DENIED.
2020-05-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 17, 2020)
2020-05-18
Application (19A1040) for a stay of execution of sentence of death, submitted to Justice Gorsuch.
2020-05-18
Brief of respondent William Stange, Warden in opposition filed.

Attorneys

Michael J. Spillane
Michael Joseph SpillaneMissouri Attorney General;s Office, Respondent
Walter Barton
Frederick Allwyn Duchardt Jr. — Petitioner