 |
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
||
NEWLAND v. SAFFOLD
United States Supreme Court No. 01-301
QUESTION PRESENTED: This case arises from a state where an unsuccessful petitioner in state habeas may seek review by filing a successive petition for an original writ in a higher court. This procedure raises the following questions:1. Is any proceeding "pending" within the meaning of the federal habeas statute of limitations tolling provision, 28 U. S. C. §2244(d)(2), during all or part of the interval between denial by the lower court and filing in this higher court?
2. If the answer to question 1 is yes, is there any limit on the time?
3. Does the answer to question 2 depend on an interpretation of the state court's disposition of the petition, i.e., whether the state court rejected it as untimely, lacking in merit, or both?
ORAL ARGUMENT DATE: February 27, 2002
Interest of amicus curiae
Summary of facts and case
Summary of argumentI. Open-ended tolling in the intervals between state review stages would defeat the central purpose of the statute, giving dilatory petitioners the benefit of delays of their own making
II. No proceeding is "pending" in the period between successive petitions, even if the second petition has a de facto appellate function
III. Whether a state court waives a state timeliness rule has no bearing on when a petition is "pending" for the purpose of § 2244(d)
IV. Any "tolling in the gaps" between stages of state collateral review should be limited to a definite state limit, whether directly applicable or "borrowed"
Conclusion