Wall v. Kahlil Kholi, USSC No. 09-868, 3/7/11 Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), “a properly filed application for State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect to the pertinent judgment or claim” tolls the 1-year limitation period for filing a federal habeas petition. 28 U. S. C. §2244(d)(2). The question in… Read more
22. Habeas corpus
Walker v. Charles W. Martin, USSC No. 09-996, 2/23/11 State court time limit for seeking postconviction relief needn’t be “fixed,” but instead may be discretionary in nature, for purposes of the habeas default rule. In a recent decision, Beard v. Kindler, 558 U. S. ___ (2009), this Court clarified that a state procedural bar may… Read more
district court decision, granting habeas relief on review of unpublished Wis COA opinion (2000AP-2460-CR); on remand from Toliver v. McCaughtry, 539 F.3d 766 (7th Cir.2008) for Toliver: Brian P. Mullins; Toliver BiC; Wis. Resp.; Reply Habeas – Ineffective Assistance – Deficient Performance Counsel performed deficiently in failing to call two potential witnesses who would have… Read more
district court decision, denying respondent’s motion to amend judgment granting habeas relief (post on original grant, here). Habeas – State’s Waiver The State’s failure to raise certain arguments, prior to grant of 2254 relief, waived its right to press those points on a Rule 59 motion to amend the judgment granting relief. The respondent in… Read more
State ex rel. Christopher L. Shelton v. Smith, 2010AP719, District 2, 1/26/11 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); case activity; State Resp. Shelton was sentenced on two pre-TIS counts: an active (indeterminate) prison sentence on one count and a consecutive term of probation on the other. He served out the first sentence, with the… Read more
Docket Decision below (617 F.3d 813 (6th Cir 2010)) Question Presented (by Scotusblog): Whether this Court’s clearly established precedent under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 holds that a prisoner is always “in custody” for purposes of Miranda any time that prisoner is isolated from the general prison population and questioned about conduct occurring outside the prison… Read more
Swarthout v. Damon Cooke, USSC No. 10-333, 1/24/11 Review under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 of a state’s decision to deny parole is limited to whether the inmate was provided an opportunity to be heard and a statement of reasons why parole was denied. The federal court simply has no authority to scrutinize the merits of the… Read more
7th Circuit decision Habeas – Procedural Default “Adequate presentation of a claim requires a petitioner to present both the operative facts and the legal principles that control each claim to the state judiciary.” (Quoting, Stevens v. McBride, 489 F.3d 883, 894 (7th Cir. 2007).) Suh procedurally defaulted his theory of recusal based on the appearance… Read more
