Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sufficiency of Evidence – Unconditional Writ

By: Derek Hawkins//July 6, 2021//

Sufficiency of Evidence – Unconditional Writ

By: Derek Hawkins//July 6, 2021//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: Kenneth Smith v. Deanna Brookhart, Warden, Lawrence Correctional Center

Case No.: 20-1588; 20-1666

Officials: WOOD, HAMILTON, and ST. EVE, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sufficiency of Evidence – Unconditional Writ

Kenneth Smith has been in state prison for nineteen years for a murder and robbery that he insists he did not commit. He achieved limited success in challenging his convictions on March 10, 2020, when the district court held that he is entitled to release unless the state decides to retry him. Smith v. Brookhart, No. 15-CV-00271, 2020 WL 1157356, at *33 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 10, 2020). But Smith was seeking more: an unconditional writ based on the insufficiency of the evidence. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2); Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979). The state has now appealed from the issuance of the conditional writ, and Smith has cross-appealed from the denial of the unconditional writ.

Even taking the highly deferential view required by section 2254(d), we find that the trial evidence failed to support Smith’s conviction beyond a reasonable doubt and that the Illinois Appellate Court was not just wrong, but unreasonable, in holding otherwise. We thus reverse the district court’s judgment and order an unconditional issuance of the writ.

Reversed and remanded

Full Text


Derek A Hawkins is Associate Corporate Counsel, IP at Amazon.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests