Lawyers USA Your Business Partner

HABEAS CORPUS 

Published: April 24, 2012

Tags: habeas corpus, Supreme Court

Courts of appeals, like district courts, have the authority, although not the obligation, to raise a forfeited timeliness defense on their own initiative in exceptional cases.

U.S. Supreme Court. Wood v. Milyard, No. 10-9995. April 24, 2012. Lawyers USA No. 993-3749.

State must reoffer plea deal 

Published: March 21, 2012

Tags: Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, habeas corpus, ineffective assistance of counsel

A state must reoffer a favorable plea deal to a criminal defendant who received a more severe sentence after rejecting the deal and standing trial because of the deficient advice of counsel, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 5-4.

Court recognizes post-conviction counsel right 

Published: March 20, 2012

Tags: habeas corpus, ineffective assistance of counsel

A criminal defendant had a narrow right to the effective assistance of counsel in a post-conviction proceeding, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in a 7-2 decision.

HABEAS CORPUS 

Published: March 19, 2012

Tags: habeas corpus

May a federal court equitably toll habeas proceedings under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act prospectively until the capital defendant is deemed competent to proceed?

U.S. Supreme Court. Tibbals v. Carter, No. 11-218. Certiorari granted: March 19, 2012. Ruling below: 644 F.3d 329 (6th Cir. 2011).

HABEAS CORPUS 

Published: March 19, 2012

Tags: habeas corpus

Can an indigent death row defendant stay federal habeas proceedings that he initiated pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3599(a)(2) – under which inmates “shall be entitled to the appointment of one or more attorneys” – if he is not competent to assist counsel?

U.S. Supreme Court. Ryan v. Gonzales, No. 10-930. Certiorari granted: March 19, 2012. Ruling below: 623 F.3d 1242 (9th Cir. 2010).

Habeas claim revived in death row case 

Published: January 18, 2012

Tags: habeas corpus, ineffective assistance of counsel

A habeas petitioner who was effectively “abandoned” by his lawyers demonstrated sufficient cause to excuse his failure to meet a state deadline for appealing the denial of postconviction relief, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in a 7-2 decision.

CRIMINAL 

Published: January 18, 2012

Tags: habeas corpus, ineffective assistance of counsel

A habeas petitioner who was effectively “abandoned” by his lawyers demonstrated sufficient cause to excuse his failure to meet a state deadline for appealing the denial of postconviction relief.

See “Habeas claim revived in death row case”

U.S. Supreme Court. » Continue Reading.

HABEAS CORPUS 

Published: January 12, 2012

Tags: habeas corpus

Because section 2253(c) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act is a mandatory but nonjurisdictional rule, a federal appellate court is not deprived of jurisdiction to adjudicate an appeal where the lower federal court did not set forth a constitutional issue in a defendant’s certificate of appealability. Further, for state prisoners who fail to seek review in the state’s highest court, the judgment to appeal for purposes of the Act becomes final on the date that the time for seeking such review expires.

U.S. Supreme Court. Gonzalez v. Thaler, No. 10-895. Jan. 10, 2012. Lawyers USA No. 993-3479.

HABEAS CORPUS 

Published: December 12, 2011

Tags: Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, habeas corpus

A federal court erred in granting habeas corpus to a defendant where the state’s witness was unavailable, because under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act a federal court cannot overturn a state court’s decision that the state took reasonable steps to find a witness merely because the federal court identified additional steps that might have been taken.

HABEAS CORPUS 

Published: September 29, 2011

Tags: habeas corpus, statute of limitations

Does an appellate court have the authority to raise sua sponte a 28 U.S.C. §2244(d) statute of limitations defense to a habeas petition, and did the state waive its statute of limitations defense when it declared to the court that it “will not challenge, but [is]  not conceding, the timeliness
» Continue Reading.