PRECEDENTIAL
      UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
           FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
                _____________

                   No. 19-1780
                  _____________

               GERALD HOWELL,
                   Appellant

                         v.

  SUPERINTENDENT ALBION SCI; ATTORNEY
         GENERAL PENNSYLVANIA
             _______________

   On Appeal from the United States District Court
      for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
             (D.C. No. 2-05-cv-02843)
       District Judge: Hon. Juan R. Sanchez
                 _______________

                      Argued
                   June 17, 2020

Before: JORDAN, MATEY, and ROTH, Circuit Judges.

             (Filed: October 21, 2020)
                 _______________
Sean E. Andrussier
Farrah Bara
Ethel Hylton
Mark Rothrock
Spencer Scheidt [ARGUED]
Duke University School of Law
210 Science Drive
Box 90360
Durham, NC 27708
      Counsel for Appellant

Max C. Kaufman
David Napiorski [ARGUED]
Philadelphia County Office of District Attorney
13th Floor
3 South Penn Square
Philadelphia, PA 19107
      Counsel for Appellees
                    _______________

                OPINION OF THE COURT
                    _______________

JORDAN, Circuit Judge.

       Herbert Allen was shot and killed on Christmas Eve,
1982. Although next to no physical evidence was recovered
from the crime scene, Gerald Howell was arrested for the
murder. His arrest and later conviction at trial were based on
witness testimony. Fast forward to today, however, and three
of the prosecution’s witnesses from the trial have recanted
their testimony. A fourth died long ago because he was
prepared to testify against another witness the




                              2
Commonwealth relied on, Kenneth Parnell, who appeared at
Howell’s preliminary hearing but later confessed to Allen’s
murder himself. Based on the recantations and Parnell’s
confession, Howell now asserts a claim of actual innocence
and seeks to set aside the District Court’s dismissal of his
untimely habeas petition.

       The District Court ruled that the recantations were
categorically unreliable and thus not an appropriate basis for
habeas relief. That was error. Although recantations are
generally looked upon with suspicion, they are not subject to
a categorical rejection, and, indeed, the recantations in this
case cast significant doubt on Howell’s conviction,
particularly when considered together with Parnell’s
confession. Although the hurdle for actual-innocence relief
on an otherwise time-barred habeas claim is very high, it is
possible that Howell can clear it. We will accordingly vacate
the order denying his motion under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 60(b)(6) to set aside the earlier dismissal of his
habeas petition and will remand to the District Court for an
evidentiary hearing on his new evidence, so that a more
complete record can be developed upon which to decide the
Rule 60(b)(6) motion.

I.    BACKGROUND

       On the evening of December 24, 1982, police officers
responded to a report of a shooting in the vicinity of 11th and
Huntingdon Streets in Philadelphia and found Herbert Allen
lying face down in his blood between two cars. He was taken
to a hospital and pronounced dead shortly thereafter. Except
for the blood stain, the police found no physical evidence at
the scene.




                              3
       A few weeks later, Gerald Howell was arrested for the
murder. At a preliminary hearing, the Commonwealth
presented the testimony of Kenneth Parnell, an acquaintance
of Howell’s. Parnell testified that on the night of the murder,
he was walking with a friend when they happened to meet
Howell. The three of them walked on together and, at some
point, saw Allen. Parnell said that Howell went over to Allen
and started “scuffling” with him. (App. at 389.) According
to Parnell, Howell then pulled out a gun, shot Allen in the
chest, and took his watc