Wall v. Kholi
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Nov 29, 2010
|Mar 7, 2011||9-0||Alito||OT 2010|
Holding: Because the phrase "collateral review" in AEDPA means judicial review of a judgment in a proceeding that is not part of direct review, state proceedings on an inmate's motion to reduce his sentence tolled the time to file his federal habeas petition.
Plain English Holding: Inmates generally have one year to file a federal petition for habeas corpus to challenge their state conviction after that conviction becomes final. However, the time spent in state court on a motion to reduce the inmateâ€™s sentence does not count toward the one-year statute of limitations.
Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Samuel Alito on March 7, 2011. Justice Scalia concurred in part.
- Last week's opinions in Plain English
- Argument recap: Parsing the scope of â€œcollateral reviewâ€ under AEDPAâ€™s tolling provision
- Argument preview: Do post-conviction pleas for leniency stop the clock on the statute of limitations for federal habeas petitions?
- No review of "must-carry" rule
Briefs and Documents
- Brief for Petitioners A.T. Wall, Director, Rhode Island Department of Corrections
- Brief for Respondent Khalil Kholi
- Reply Brief for Petitioner A.T. Wall, Director, Rhode Island Department of Corrections
- Brief for the States of Delaware, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming in Support of Petitioners
- Opinion Below (1st Circuit)
- Petition for certiorari (unavailable)
- Brief in opposition (unavailable)
- Petitioner’s reply (unavailable)