Jennings v. United States, No. 11-3127 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CasePetitioner, convicted of two counts of mail fraud and one count of money laundering, appealed the district court's denial of his motion to vacate his conviction under 28 U.S.C. 2255. Because the court found that petitioner could not demonstrate that it was more likely than not that no reasonable juror would have convicted him of the offenses under the statute's narrower interpretation, petitioner did not meet the exception for actual innocence to excuse his procedural default. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Prisoner case - prisoner civil rights. For the court's opinion in Jennings' direct appeal, see United States v. Jennings, 487 F.3d 564 (8th Cir. 2007). Jennings did not raise the claim contained in his Section 2255 petition in his direct appeal, and the claim was procedurally defaulted; the evidence at trial was sufficient to demonstrate a kickback scheme as contemplated by Skilling v. United States, 130 S.Ct. 2896 (2010), and Jennings' claim of actual innocence to excuse his procedural default is rejected.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.