People v. Flores

Defendant appealed from the denial of permission for leave to file a successive post-conviction petition under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act, arguing that it set forth a colorable claim of actual innocence of his conviction for aggravated arson. The appellate court affirmed, finding that defendant’s claim was not one of actual innocence where it was premised on an argument that his guilty plea did not have a sufficient factual basis and, as a result, was not intelligent and voluntary and, thus, could not overcome the bar against successive post-conviction petitions. (BRENNAN and HUDSON, concurring)