Under no interpretation of the law should anyone deemed to be "actually innocent" continue to be imprisoned. Seems like common sense to me. But not in the 9th Circuit.
Robert Lee was convicted in 1995 for a crime he did not commit. His innocence is not in dispute. The only question before the court was whether there is an exception for "actual innocence" under federal Habeas Corpus. Judge O'Scannlain:
... there is no "actual innocence" exception to the one-year statute of limitation for filing an original petition for habeas corpus relief.
A Federal Judge wrote that. In America. In 2010. Just think about that for a minute.
How weak have our courts become, that they allow a legislature to gut the Great Writ? And when the opportunity arises to use the judiciary's inherent power to right that which is wrong, they prove themselves gutless, or at least not up to the task.