## Facts

- Floyd Perkins was convicted in Michigan state court of the 1993 murder of Rodney Henderson and sentenced to life without parole.
- The prosecution’s key witness testified that Perkins stabbed the victim; Perkins testified that the witness was the killer.
- Perkins’s conviction became final in 1997.
- AEDPA imposed a one-year federal habeas filing deadline, but Perkins filed his federal petition on July 13, 2008, more than ten years late.
- Perkins relied on three affidavits (dated 1997, 1999, and July 16, 2002) that tended to implicate the prosecution’s witness and exculpate Perkins.
- The federal district court dismissed the petition as time-barred and concluded Perkins had not shown the level of actual innocence needed to bypass the time bar.
- The Sixth Circuit held that a credible actual-innocence claim could overcome AEDPA’s limitations period and allowed Perkins to proceed despite lack of diligence.
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether actual innocence can excuse AEDPA untimeliness and what role delay plays.

## Issues

1. Whether a convincing showing of actual innocence can permit federal habeas review despite AEDPA’s one-year statute of limitations.
2. If so, whether the petitioner must also satisfy equitable-tolling prerequisites (diligence and extraordinary circumstances), and how delay in presenting new evidence affects the analysis.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court held that actual innocence, if proved, can serve as a gateway to allow review of otherwise time-barred federal habeas claims.
- The Court rejected requiring a separate showing of diligence or extraordinary circumstances as a condition to invoke the actual-innocence gateway.
- The Court held that unjustified delay remains relevant because it bears on the credibility and reliability of the proffered innocence evidence.
- The Court did not decide whether Perkins met the actual-innocence standard and remanded for the district court to evaluate that question in the first instance.

## Legal Principles

- A credible showing of actual innocence can excuse the expiration of AEDPA’s one-year limitations period and allow review of otherwise barred constitutional claims.
- The applicable gateway standard is the Schlup “miscarriage of justice” test: in light of new evidence, it must be more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted.
- The actual-innocence gateway is distinct from equitable tolling and does not require independent proof of diligence or extraordinary circumstances.
- Delay in presenting new evidence is a factor in assessing whether the innocence showing is credible and sufficient under Schlup.

## Conclusion

Actual innocence can provide a narrow gateway through AEDPA’s statute of limitations, but petitioners face a demanding Schlup burden, and substantial unexplained delay weighs against the reliability of the asserted new evidence; the case was remanded to determine whether that standard was met.


McQuiggin v. Perkins, 569 U.S. 383 (2013)