Court Opinion

ID: 9814282
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 23:45:07.429621+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:39:04.348673
License: Public Domain

SUTTON, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur in Judge Clay’s thoughtful opinion and write only to mention two additional points. One concerns the question of “new evidence.” Given the weaknesses in Connolly’s “new evidence” argument, we need not address a problem that has concerned the other circuits — namely, whether there is a meaningful difference between “newly discovered” and “newly presented” evidence. See Wright v. Quarterman, 470 F.3d 581, 591 (5th Cir.2006); United States v. Davies, 394 F.3d 182, 191 n. 8 (3d Cir.2005); Gomez v. Jaimet, 350 F.3d 673, 679 (7th Cir.2003); Griffin v. Johnson, 350 F.3d 956, 963 (9th Cir.2003); see also Osborne v. Purkett, 411 F.3d 911, 920 (8th Cir.2005). The second point relates to the Rule 404(b) question. Connolly, I would add, has declined to argue that we may not consider this evidence in deciding whether he has established an actual-innocence claim.