Wall v. Kholi

5 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. Habeas, Time Limit, Tolling by Collateral Review

    Tieber Law OfficeF. Martin TieberOctober 30, 2011

    Wall v Kholi, __ US __; 131 S Ct 1278 (2011)(march’11). Under the AEDPA a habeas petition must be filed within one year of the end of direct review.

  2. Habeas, Time Limit, Tolling by Collateral Review

    Tieber Law OfficeF. Martin TieberMay 31, 2011

    Wall v Kholi, __ US __; 131 S Ct 1278 (2011)(march’11). Under the AEDPA a habeas petition must be filed within one year of the end of direct review.

  3. Habeas Corpus - GVR

    Habeas Corpus BlogMarch 22, 2011

    And I'll point out with bold lettering where GVR comes from:09-11056BAKER, TYRONE V. BUSS, SEC., FL DOCThe motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and the petition for a writ of certiorari are granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit for further consideration in light of Wall v. Kholi, 562 U.S. ___ (2011).Without looking at the lower court decision in Baker, I am guessing that Florida has a collateral procedure similar to the Rhode Island one at issue in Wall v. Kholi.

  4. Capital Defense Weekly, March 21, 2011

    Capital Defense NewsletterMarch 21, 2011

    " [via SCOTUSBlogHenry Skinner v. Switzer, No. 09-9000 (3/7/2011) "A convicted state prisoner seeking DNA testing of crime-scene evidence may assert that claim in a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 1983."Wall v. Kholi, No. 09-868 (3/7/2011) AEDPA's one year statute of limitations is tolled even where just a challenge to sentence is filed, so long as that challenge isn't just a direct appeal application.Week of March 14, 2011: In Favor of the Prosecution or WardenNelson Serrano v. State, 2011 Fla. LEXIS 619 (FL 3/17/2011) “Serrano raises nine issues on appeal: (1) whether the circumstantial evidence is sufficient to support his convictions; (2) whether Serrano’s statements to FDLE Agent Tommy Ray were admissible; (3) whether the trial court properly denied Serrano’s motions to dismiss the indictment and divest itself of jurisdiction; (4) whether the prosecutor engaged in misconduct that entitles Serrano to relief; (5) whether the trial court properly denied Serrano’s motion for a change of venue; (6) whether the testimony of the State’s bloodstain pattern expert was admissible; (7) whether the State improperly cross-examined Serrano’s character witnesses about collateral crimes at the Spencer hearing; (8) whether the avoi

  5. Capital Defense Weekly, March 14, 2011

    Capital Defense NewsletterMarch 14, 2011

    - kPending Executions March29 Eric King* (Az)31 William Glenn Boyd* (Ala) April5 Cleve Foster* (Tex)5 Daniel Wayne Cook* (Az)6 Wayne Kubsch (Ind)12 Clarence Carter* (Ohio)May3 Cary Kerr* (Tex)17 Daniel Bedford* (Ohio)Stays & CommutationsFebruary9 Roy Blankenship* (Ga)15 Edward Harbison* (Tenn) (clemency) ExecutionsFebruary 9 Martin Link (Mo)15 Michael Wayne Hall* (Tex) 17 Frank Spisak* (Ohio)22 Timothy Adams* (Tex)March10 Johnie Baston* (Ohio) *"serious" execution date / (s) stay believed likely / (V) Volunteer / note this list may erroneously exclude some dates [via DPIC]SCOTUSHenry Skinner v. Switzer, No. 09-9000 (3/7/2011) "A convicted state prisoner seeking DNA testing of crime-scene evidence may assert that claim in a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 1983." Wall v. Kholi, No. 09-868 (3/7/2011) AEDPA's one year statute of limitations is tolled even where just a challenge to sentence is filed, so long as that challenge isn't just a direct appeal application.Week of March 7, 2011: In Favor of the Prosecution or WardenTerrance Williams v. Beard, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 4517 (3rd Cir March 9, 2011) Relief denied on “(1) whether trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective during the penalty phase of trial, and (2) whether the Commonwealth exercised its peremptory strikes in a racially discriminatory manner in violation of Batson v. Kentucky,” as well as (3) “the constitutional propriety of the trial court’s accomplice liability instructions. We conclude that each issue is without merit and will affirm.”