≡ Menu

6. State’s defenses

seventh circuit decision Habeas – Procedural Default A federal claim procedurally defaulted in state court works foreclosure of federal habeas review. That the state court engaged plain error review doesn’t mean that the default was overlooked and the merits of the claim reached. Here, the Illinois court refused to reach the merits of Kaczmarek’s Apprendi claim… Read more

{ 0 comments }

7th circuit court of appeals decision, on habeas review of summary order of Wisconsin court of appeals Habeas – Procedural Default & No-Merit Report Johnson’s failure to assert an ineffective assistance of (trial) counsel claim in response to his appellate attorney’s no-merit report did not procedurally default that claim for purposes of subsequent collateral attack… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Issue: Whether, in federal habeas corpus proceedings, a state law under which a prisoner may be barred from collaterally attacking his conviction when the prisoner “substantially delayed” filing his habeas petition is “inadequate” to support a procedural bar because (1) the federal court believes that the rule is vague and (2) the state failed to prove that its courts “consistently” exercised their discretion when applying… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Magwood v. Patterson, USSC No. 09-158, 6/24/10 After a defendant has been resentenced in state court pursuant to relief granted on a federal habeas petition, a second federal habeas petition challenging the new sentence will be treated as a first petition (vs. a “2nd or successive” petition), even if raising grounds that could have been raised… Read more

{ 0 comments }

7th circuit court of appeals decision Issues as Defined by Certificate of Appealability Holmes’s failure to brief on appeal the merits of his constitutional claims did not waive them, because the order granting certificate of appealability “invited the parties only to brief the [threshold] procedural issue” of whether the claims had been defaulted in state… Read more

{ 0 comments }

Question Presented: Whether a state court sentence-reduction motion consisting of a plea for leniency constitutes an “application for State post-conviction or other collateral review,” 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2), thus tolling the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act’s one-year limitations period for a state prisoner to file a federal habeas corpus petition. Opinion below (1st Circuit)… Read more

{ 0 comments }

7th Circuit court of appeals decision Habeas – Procedural Bar Smith defaulted one claim by failing to raise it “in a full round of appellate review” in state court (i.e., he failed to include the issue in his request for Illinois supreme court review). He is unable to overcome the resultant bar on habeas review… Read more

{ 0 comments }

7th circuit court of appeals decision; habeas review of: Wis court of appeals decision, 03AP3252 Habeas – Supplement Record … Although we generally decline to supplement the record on appeal with materials not before the district court, we have not applied this position categorically. See, e.g., Ruvalcaba v. Chandler, 416 F.3d 555, 562 n.2 (7th Cir. 2005) (in habeas… Read more

{ 0 comments }
RSS