Blacklock v. Schnurr
24-3125
10th Cir.Nov 25, 2024Background
- Christopher K. Blacklock was convicted in Kansas of second-degree murder and drug offenses after stabbing Ziahdrick Williams during a drug trafficking trip from Texas to Iowa.
- At trial, Blacklock admitted to stabbing Williams but claimed self-defense, believing Williams and another associate planned to kill him.
- The jury heard conflicting evidence on whether Williams was armed and the circumstances justifying Blacklock's use of force; Blacklock was sentenced to over 25 years in prison.
- Blacklock exhausted direct appeals and state post-conviction relief before filing a federal habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, which was denied as untimely.
- The federal district court found Blacklock’s new evidence did not meet the actual innocence standard to excuse the missed filing deadline, and denied a certificate of appealability (COA).
- Blacklock appealed, seeking a COA to challenge the district court's procedural and substantive rulings regarding "actual innocence."
Issues
| Issue | Blacklock's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of § 2254 petition | Petition is timely or excused by actual innocence | Petition filed after the limitations period | Petition is untimely |
| Applicability of actual innocence exception | New evidence proves self-defense/innocence | New evidence is unreliable or immaterial | Exception does not apply; no credible innocence |
| Value of new evidence (Williams’ criminal record) | Prior conviction supports reasonableness of fear | Blacklock was unaware of it; not relevant | Not likely to sway a reasonable juror |
| Reliability/impact of Nesbitt’s statements | Shows plot to kill Blacklock, strengthens defense | Evidence is hearsay, vague, and speculative | Insufficient for credible actual innocence claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (actual innocence is a gateway for otherwise barred habeas claims, not a constitutional right itself)
- Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (actual innocence standard requires new, reliable evidence demonstrating it is more likely than not no reasonable juror would convict)
- House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (court evaluates all evidence, old and new, under actual innocence claims)
- McQuiggin v. Perkins, 569 U.S. 383 (actual innocence can allow review of untimely habeas petitions, but standard is demanding)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (standard for issuing a certificate of appealability involves assessing debatable procedural and constitutional rulings)