Legal Opinion

Frank Hubbard v. Steven Pinchak the Attorney General of the State of New Jersey Peter Verniero

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided August 5, 2004No. 00-5150PublishedCited by 209 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

SLOVITER, Circuit Judge.

Petitioner Frank M. Hubbard seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He procedurally defaulted his claims in the state courts. He seeks to overcome the procedural default by asserting his “actual innocence,” Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614, 623, 118 S.Ct. 1604, 140 L.Ed.2d 828 (1998); Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 327, 115 S.Ct. 851, 130 L.Ed.2d 808 (1995), a claim that the District Court rejected. We must therefore examine the scope and contours of the claim of actual innocence as a gateway to consideration of the merits…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Schlup v. DeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. Wainwright v. SykesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Bousley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
  4. Harris v. ReedSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Calderon v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1998

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by209 opinions

  1. Larry Pat Souter v. Kurt Jones, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  2. Fontenot v. CrowCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2021
  3. Jerry Reeves v. Superintendent Fayette SCICourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
  4. Goldblum v. KlemCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
  5. Houck v. StickmanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010

204 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API