Crux of Innocence claim

It is Kenny's intention to raise -for the first time- a claim of actual innocence due to involuntary intoxication. There exists ample evidence to support such a claim through collateral proceedings like a Successive Petition for Post-Conviction or Federal Habeas Corpus Relief. This is possible since the new evidence (when balanced against the trial evidence) weighs in favor of a substantial showing of actual innocence (FN 25). To briefly demonstrate how the trial and new evidence is relevant to Kenny's actual innocence claim you are asked to consider the following: 

  1. Trial counsel was grossly ineffective (FN 26). Kenny's attorney never hired a psychologist or psychiatrist to examine him despite  ample of mental health issues. Although counsel did attempt to raise PTSD defense, he did so without any experts (FN 27). The jury heard no expert psychological testimony. 
  2. New medical evidence demonstrates that Kenny lacked intent to commit murder (FN 28). 

As stated earlier, it has been discovered that medical and mental health professionals repeatedly misdiagnosed and improperly treated him for anxiety and depression rather than bipolar disorder (FN 29). Similarly, DNA shows that Kenny does not metabolize medications effectively (FN 30). Both of these matters would be relevant to a jury determination of the facts on a retrial since a build up of Zoloft in his system likely contributed to his violent behavior towards Kim (FN 31).