Michon Houston v. Jeff Tanner -Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Affirmed
The Sixth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of Michon D. Houston’s second federal habeas petition. The panel held that Houston failed both the AEDPA gate-keeping test under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)(B) and the equitable-tolling doctrine because his proffered affidavits were either untimely, unreliable, or not sufficiently tied to his ineffective-assistance claim.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether, in evaluating a successive habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2)(B)(ii), a court may consider new evidence that is not itself connected to (i.e., ‘rooted in’) the asserted constitutional violation.
Circuit Positions
Newly proffered facts must be rooted in the alleged constitutional violation; unrelated evidence cannot be considered under § 2244(b)(2)(B)(ii).
A court may evaluate any newly discovered evidence, even if it is not tied to the specific constitutional error, when applying § 2244(b)(2)(B)(ii).
Conflict Summary
The Tenth Circuit (and, in this opinion, the Sixth Circuit) requires that any new evidence considered under § 2244(b)(2)(B)(ii) be directly tied to the alleged constitutional error at trial. The Fourth Circuit, relying on United States v. MacDonald, has indicated that courts may look to all newly discovered evidence—even if it is not connected to the constitutional claim—when deciding whether the petitioner can pass the actual-innocence gateway. The Sixth Circuit expressly acknowledged this disagreement and, for purposes of this case, sided with the Tenth Circuit’s ‘linkage’ requirement.