holland
florida
argued
march
decided
june
petitioner
holland
convicted
murder
sentenced
death
florida
state
state
affirmed
direct
appeal
denied
collateral
relief
holland
filed
pro
se
federal
habeas
corpus
petition
approximately
five
weeks
late
statute
limitations
set
forth
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
record
facts
reveal
inter
alia
holland
attorney
bradley
collins
failed
file
timely
federal
petition
despite
holland
many
letters
emphasizing
importance
collins
apparently
research
necessary
find
proper
filing
date
despite
fact
holland
identified
applicable
legal
rules
collins
failed
inform
holland
timely
manner
state
decided
case
despite
holland
many
pleas
information
collins
failed
communicate
holland
period
years
despite
holland
pleas
responses
letters
meanwhile
holland
repeatedly
requested
state
courts
florida
bar
remove
collins
case
based
record
facts
holland
asked
federal
district
toll
aedpa
limitations
period
equitable
reasons
refused
holding
demonstrated
due
diligence
necessary
invoke
equitable
tolling
affirming
eleventh
circuit
held
regardless
diligence
holland
case
constitute
extraordinary
circumstances
specifically
held
petitioner
seeks
excuse
late
filing
based
attorney
unprofessional
conduct
conduct
even
grossly
negligent
justify
equitable
tolling
absent
proof
bad
faith
dishonesty
divided
loyalty
mental
impairment
like
held
section
aedpa
statute
limitations
subject
equitable
tolling
appropriate
cases
pp
several
considerations
support
holding
first
aedpa
statute
limitations
defense
day
mcdonough
subject
rebuttable
presumption
favor
equitable
tolling
irwin
department
veterans
affairs
presumption
strength
reinforced
fact
equitable
principles
traditionally
governed
substantive
habeas
law
munaf
geren
fact
congress
enacted
aedpa
irwin
therefore
likely
aware
courts
interpreting
aedpa
timing
provisions
apply
presumption
see
merck
reynolds
second
differs
significantly
statutes
issue
brockamp
beggerly
held
irwin
presumption
overcome
example
unlike
subject
matters
issue
cases
tax
collection
land
claims
aedpa
subject
matter
habeas
corpus
pertains
area
law
equity
finds
comfortable
home
see
munaf
supra
brockamp
supra
distinguished
moreover
aedpa
limitations
period
neither
unusually
generous
unusually
complex
finally
disagrees
respondent
argument
equitable
tolling
undermines
aedpa
basic
purpose
eliminating
delays
federal
habeas
review
process
see
day
supra
aedpa
seeks
without
undermining
basic
habeas
corpus
principles
harmonizing
statute
prior
law
petition
timeliness
always
determined
equitable
principles
see
slack
mcdaniel
harmonization
along
great
writ
importance
writ
explicitly
protected
constitution
counsels
hesitancy
interpreting
aedpa
silence
equitable
tolling
congressional
intent
close
courthouse
doors
strong
equitable
claim
keep
open
pp
eleventh
circuit
per
se
standard
rigid
petitioner
entitled
equitable
tolling
shows
pursuing
rights
diligently
extraordinary
circumstance
stood
way
prevented
timely
filing
pace
diguglielmo
extraordinary
circumstances
limited
satisfy
eleventh
circuit
test
courts
must
often
exercise
equity
powers
basis
baggett
bullitt
demonstrating
flexibility
avoiding
mechanical
rules
holmberg
armbrecht
order
relieve
hardships
aris
ing
hard
fast
adherence
absolute
legal
rules
glass
cases
recognize
equity
courts
draw
upon
decisions
made
similar
cases
guidance
exercising
judgment
light
precedent
awareness
fact
specific
circumstances
often
hard
predict
warrant
special
treatment
appropriate
case
coleman
thompson
distinguished
rule
law
precedent
demands
eleventh
circuit
rule
rule
difficult
reconcile
general
equitable
principles
fails
recognize
least
sometimes
attorney
unprofessional
conduct
egregious
create
extraordinary
circumstance
warranting
equitable
tolling
several
federal
courts
specifically
held
although
equitable
tolling
warranted
garden
variety
claim
excusable
neglect
irwin
supra
case
presents
far
serious
instances
attorney
misconduct
pp
record
facts
suggest
case
may
well
present
extraordinary
circumstances
state
conclusion
absolutely
proceedings
may
necessary
district
incorrectly
rested
ruling
lack
circumstances
lack
diligence
holland
diligently
pursued
rights
writing
collins
numerous
letters
seeking
crucial
information
providing
direction
repeatedly
requesting
collins
removed
case
filing
pro
se
habeas
petition
day
learned
aedpa
filing
period
expired
district
erroneously
concluded
holland
diligent
appeals
erroneously
relied
overly
rigid
per
se
approach
lower
yet
considered
whether
facts
case
indeed
constitute
extraordinary
circumstances
sufficient
warrant
equitable
tolling
eleventh
circuit
may
determine
remand
whether
tolling
appropriate
whether
evidentiary
hearing
proceedings
might
indicate
state
prevail
pp
reversed
remanded
breyer
delivered
opinion
roberts
stevens
kennedy
ginsburg
sotomayor
joined
alito
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
scalia
filed
dissenting
opinion
thomas
joined
part
albert
holland
petitioner
florida
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
june
justice
breyer
delivered
opinion
decide
timeliness
provision
federal
habeas
corpus
statute
subject
equitable
tolling
see
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
also
consider
application
case
appeals
view
petitioner
seeks
excuse
late
filing
basis
attorney
unprofessional
conduct
conduct
even
negligent
grossly
negligent
rise
level
egregious
attorney
misconduct
warrant
equitable
tolling
unless
petitioner
offers
proof
bad
faith
dishonesty
divided
loyalty
mental
impairment
forth
per
curiam
view
standard
rigid
see
irwin
department
veterans
affairs
see
also
lawrence
florida
therefore
reverse
judgment
appeals
remand
proceedings
aedpa
period
limitation
shall
apply
application
writ
habeas
corpus
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
also
says
time
properly
filed
application
state
review
pending
shall
counted
period
january
albert
holland
filed
pro
se
habeas
corpus
petition
federal
district
southern
district
florida
holland
petitioner
state
florida
respondent
agree
unless
equitably
tolled
statutory
limitations
period
applicable
holland
petition
expired
approximately
five
weeks
petition
filed
see
brief
respondent
brief
petitioner
holland
asked
district
toll
limitations
period
equitable
reasons
shall
set
forth
detail
record
facts
underlie
holland
claim
holland
convicted
murder
sentenced
death
florida
affirmed
judgment
holland
state
october
denied
holland
petition
certiorari
date
date
denial
petition
ended
direct
review
holland
conviction
aedpa
limitations
clock
began
run
see
jimenez
quarterman
slip
days
later
november
florida
appointed
attorney
bradley
collins
represent
holland
state
federal
postconviction
proceedings
cf
stat
september
days
appointment
days
aedpa
limitations
period
expired
collins
acting
holland
behalf
filed
motion
postconviction
relief
state
trial
cf
brief
respondent
filing
automatically
stopped
running
aedpa
limitations
period
said
days
left
clock
next
three
years
holland
petition
remained
pending
state
courts
time
holland
wrote
collins
letters
asking
make
certain
claims
preserved
subsequent
federal
habeas
corpus
review
collins
wrote
back
stating
like
reassure
aware
limitations
federal
exhaustion
requirements
app
also
said
presen
federal
courts
holland
claims
state
courts
denied
ibid
second
letter
collins
added
motion
relief
denied
state
courts
state
habeas
corpus
claims
ripe
presentation
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
federal
state
trial
denied
holland
relief
collins
appealed
denial
florida
almost
two
years
later
february
florida
heard
oral
argument
case
see
period
relations
collins
holland
began
break
indeed
april
january
collins
communicated
holland
three
times
time
letter
see
sd
apr
hereinafter
district
opinion
app
holland
unhappy
lack
communication
twice
wrote
florida
asking
remove
collins
case
second
letter
filed
june
said
collins
experienced
complete
breakdown
communication
app
holland
informed
collins
kept
updated
status
capital
case
holland
seen
spoken
collins
since
april
wrote
collins
abandoned
said
idea
going
capital
case
appeal
added
collins
never
made
reasonable
effort
establish
relationship
trust
confidence
stated
trust
confidence
collin
ability
represent
holland
concluded
asking
collins
dismissed
removed
capital
case
given
hearing
order
demonstrate
collins
deficiencies
state
responded
holland
file
pro
se
papers
represented
counsel
including
papers
seeking
new
counsel
florida
agreed
denied
holland
requests
period
holland
wrote
various
letters
clerk
florida
last
wrote
competent
postconviction
appellate
attorney
representing
write
letter
trying
get
nerves
like
know
exactly
happening
case
appeal
florida
time
period
holland
also
filed
complaint
collins
florida
bar
association
complaint
denied
collins
argued
holland
appeal
florida
february
shortly
thereafter
holland
wrote
collins
emphasizing
importance
filing
timely
petition
habeas
corpus
federal
florida
issued
ruling
specifically
march
holland
wrote
dear
collins
fine
hope
write
letter
ask
please
write
back
soon
possible
let
know
status
case
appeal
florida
florida
denies
postconviction
state
habeas
corpus
appeals
please
file
writ
habeas
corpus
petition
deadline
file
runs
expires
thank
much
please
nice
day
app
emphasis
added
collins
answer
letter
june
holland
wrote
dear
collins
fine
hope
march
wrote
letter
asking
let
know
status
case
appeal
florida
also
begun
preparing
writ
habeas
corpus
petition
please
let
know
soon
possible
thank
emphasis
added
collins
reply
five
months
later
november
florida
affirmed
lower
decision
denying
holland
relief
holland
state
per
curiam
three
weeks
december
issued
mandate
making
decision
final
point
aedpa
federal
habeas
clock
began
tick
days
left
meter
see
coates
byrd
per
curiam
aedpa
clock
restarts
state
completes
postconviction
review
lawrence
twelve
days
later
december
holland
aedpa
time
limit
expired
four
weeks
aedpa
time
limit
expired
january
holland
still
unaware
florida
ruling
issued
case
two
months
earlier
wrote
collins
third
letter
dear
bradley
collins
fine
hope
write
letter
ask
please
let
know
status
appeals
florida
appeals
decided
yet
please
send
necessary
information
determine
deadline
file
rule
federal
habeas
corpus
petition
accordance
eleventh
circuit
case
law
applicable
effective
death
penalty
act
appeals
florida
denied
please
advised
want
preserve
privilege
federal
review
state
convictions
sentences
collins
please
also
inform
district
rule
federal
habeas
corpus
petition
timely
filed
address
thank
much
app
collins
answer
nine
days
later
january
holland
working
prison
library
learned
first
time
florida
issued
final
determination
case
mandate
issued
five
weeks
prior
immediately
wrote
pro
se
federal
habeas
petition
mailed
federal
district
southern
district
florida
next
day
ibid
petition
begins
stating
comes
albert
holland
florida
death
row
inmate
appointed
counsel
failed
undertake
timely
action
seek
federal
review
case
filing
rule
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
behalf
app
describes
various
constitutional
claims
holland
hoped
assert
federal
day
mailed
petition
holland
received
letter
collins
telling
collins
intended
file
petition
certiorari
state
recent
ruling
holland
answered
immediately
dear
bradley
collins
since
recently
florida
denied
postconviction
state
writ
habeas
corpus
petition
left
understand
planning
seek
certiorari
matters
understanding
aedpa
time
limitations
tolled
discretionary
appellate
reviews
certiorari
applications
resulting
denial
state
post
conviction
proceedings
therefore
advise
file
certiorari
affects
jeopardizes
one
year
grace
period
prescribed
aedpa
thank
much
emphasis
deleted
holland
right
law
see
coates
supra
aedpa
tolled
pendency
petition
certiorari
judgment
denying
state
postconviction
review
accord
lawrence
florida
aff
january
holland
tried
call
collins
prison
called
collect
collins
office
accept
call
app
five
days
later
collins
wrote
holland
told
first
time
collins
understood
aedpa
law
limitations
period
applicable
holland
federal
habeas
application
fact
expired
collins
begun
represent
holland
specifically
collins
wrote
dear
holland
receipt
letter
dated
january
concerning
operation
aedpa
time
limitations
one
hurdle
upcoming
efforts
obtaining
federal
habeas
corpus
relief
statutory
time
frame
filing
petition
began
run
case
affirmed
october
judgment
sentence
affirmed
florida
however
november
received
order
appointing
case
see
appointed
year
case
became
final
aedpa
time
period
thus
run
appointment
therefore
postconviction
motion
filed
emphasis
added
collins
wrong
law
said
holland
limitations
period
begin
run
denied
holland
petition
certiorari
state
courts
denial
relief
direct
review
occurred
october
see
jimenez
slip
bond
moore
collins
appointed
november
aedpa
clock
therefore
days
left
go
holland
immediately
wrote
back
collins
pointing
dear
collins
received
letter
dated
january
incorrect
stating
statutory
time
frame
filing
petition
began
run
case
affirmed
october
florida
stated
page
three
recently
filed
petition
writ
certiorari
october
denied
initial
petition
writ
certiorari
case
became
final
meant
time
tolled
filed
postconviction
motion
trial
also
collins
never
told
time
ran
expired
told
timely
file
habeas
corpus
petition
deadline
never
informed
oral
arguments
florida
november
decision
denying
postconviction
appeals
never
kept
informed
status
case
although
told
immediately
inform
decision
soon
heard
anything
collins
filed
motion
january
federal
preserve
rights
want
heard
anything
aforesaid
motion
know
status
aforesaid
motion
collins
please
file
habeas
petition
immediately
please
wait
longer
even
though
untimely
filed
least
filed
without
wasting
anymore
time
valuable
time
please
file
petition
letter
first
time
ever
mentioned
anything
time
run
appointed
represent
started
run
october
please
find
status
motion
filed
january
let
know
thank
much
app
collins
answer
letter
file
federal
habeas
petition
holland
requested
march
holland
filed
another
complaint
collins
florida
bar
association
see
record
doc
exh
time
bar
asked
collins
respond
attorney
march
next
day
three
months
holland
aedpa
statute
limitations
expired
collins
mailed
proposed
federal
habeas
petition
holland
asking
review
see
doc
exh
point
holland
already
filed
pro
se
motion
district
asking
collins
dismissed
attorney
app
state
responded
request
arguing
holland
file
pro
se
motion
seeking
collins
removed
represented
counsel
represented
collins
see
time
considered
holland
motion
permitted
collins
withdraw
case
appointed
new
lawyer
holland
see
record
docs
also
received
briefing
whether
circumstances
case
justified
equitable
tolling
aedpa
limitations
period
sufficient
period
time
approximately
five
weeks
make
holland
petition
timely
considering
briefs
federal
district
held
facts
warrant
equitable
tolling
consequently
holland
petition
untimely
noting
collins
prepared
numerous
filings
holland
behalf
state
courts
suggesting
holland
difficult
client
intimated
hold
collins
professional
conduct
case
worst
merely
negligent
see
district
opinion
app
rested
holding
alternative
rationale
wrote
even
collins
behavior
characterized
circumstance
holland
seek
help
system
find
date
mandate
issued
denying
state
habeas
petition
seek
aid
supporters
app
hence
held
holland
demonstrate
due
diligence
necessary
invoke
equitable
tolling
ibid
appeal
eleventh
circuit
agreed
district
holland
habeas
petition
untimely
appeals
first
agreed
holland
quitable
tolling
applied
aedpa
statutory
deadline
quoting
helton
secretary
dept
corrections
also
held
equitable
tolling
applied
case
like
holland
involves
ure
professional
negligence
part
petitioner
attorney
behavior
never
constitute
extraordinary
circumstance
wrote
assume
collins
alleged
conduct
negligent
even
grossly
negligent
view
allegation
lawyer
negligence
failure
meet
lawyer
standard
care
absence
allegation
proof
bad
faith
dishonesty
divided
loyalty
mental
impairment
forth
lawyer
part
rise
level
egregious
attorney
misconduct
entitle
petitioner
equitable
tolling
ibid
holland
made
allegation
collins
made
knowing
reckless
factual
misrepresentation
exhibited
dishonesty
divided
loyalty
mental
impairment
ibid
hence
held
equitable
tolling
per
se
inapplicable
holland
habeas
petition
address
district
ruling
respect
holland
diligence
holland
petitioned
certiorari
appeals
application
equitable
tolling
doctrine
instances
professional
misconduct
conflicts
approach
taken
circuits
granted
petition
compare
case
baldayaque
applying
less
categorical
approach
spitsyn
moore
ii
decided
whether
aedpa
statutory
limitations
period
may
tolled
equitable
reasons
see
lawrence
pace
diguglielmo
like
courts
appeals
considered
question
hold
subject
equitable
tolling
appropriate
cases
see
neverson
farquharson
smith
mcginnis
per
curiam
miller
new
jersey
dept
corrections
harris
hutchinson
davis
johnson
mcclendon
sherman
taliani
chrans
moore
calderon
dist
central
dist
miller
marr
sandvik
per
curiam
base
conclusion
following
considerations
first
aedpa
statute
limitations
defense
day
mcdonough
set
forth
inflexible
rule
requiring
dismissal
whenever
clock
run
see
also
scalia
dissenting
repeatedly
stated
enactment
periods
without
elaboration
produces
defenses
nonjurisdictional
thus
subject
waiver
forfeiture
citing
cases
brief
respondent
describing
aedpa
limitations
period
previously
made
clear
nonjurisdictional
federal
statute
limitations
normally
subject
rebuttable
presumption
favor
equitable
tolling
irwin
see
also
young
hornbook
law
limitations
periods
subject
equitable
tolling
quoting
irwin
supra
case
aedpa
presumption
strength
reinforced
fact
traditionally
substantive
law
habeas
corpus
munaf
geren
construe
statute
displace
courts
traditional
equitable
authority
absent
command
miller
french
quoting
califano
yamasaki
presumption
strength
yet
reinforced
fact
congress
enacted
aedpa
decided
irwin
therefore
likely
aware
courts
interpreting
aedpa
timing
provisions
apply
presumption
see
merck
reynolds
slip
second
statute
differs
significantly
statutes
issue
brockamp
beggerly
two
cases
held
irwin
presumption
overcome
brockamp
interpreted
statute
limitations
silent
question
equitable
tolling
foreclosing
application
doctrine
emphasized
statute
issue
se
forth
time
limitations
unusually
emphatic
form
used
highly
detailed
technical
language
linguistically
speaking
easily
read
containing
implicit
exceptions
reiterate
limitations
several
times
several
different
ways
related
underlying
subject
matter
nationwide
tax
collection
respect
practical
consequences
permitting
tolling
substantial
tolled
require
tolling
procedural
limitations
also
substantive
limitations
amount
recovery
kind
tolling
found
direct
precedent
beggerly
held
irwin
presumption
overcome
statute
limitations
issue
unusually
generous
underlying
claim
deal
ownership
land
thereby
implicated
landowners
need
know
certainty
rights
period
rights
may
subject
challenge
way
contrast
aedpa
statute
limitations
unlike
statute
issue
brockamp
contain
language
unusually
emphatic
time
limitation
neither
application
equitable
tolling
affect
substance
petitioner
claim
moreover
contrast
limitations
period
issue
beggerly
aedpa
limitations
period
particularly
long
unlike
subject
matters
issue
brockamp
beggerly
tax
collection
land
claims
aedpa
subject
matter
habeas
corpus
pertains
area
law
equity
finds
comfortable
home
see
munaf
supra
short
aedpa
limit
reads
like
ordinary
statute
limitations
see
calderon
supra
respondent
citing
brockamp
argues
aedpa
interpreted
foreclose
equitable
tolling
statute
sets
forth
explicit
exceptions
basic
time
limits
include
tolling
see
brief
respondent
statute
contain
multiple
provisions
relating
events
trigger
running
see
clay
see
also
cada
baxter
healthcare
must
distinguish
accrual
plaintiff
claim
tolling
statute
limitations
wims
wolin
smith
barney
concede
silent
equitable
tolling
containing
one
provision
expressly
refers
different
kind
tolling
see
stating
time
petitioner
pending
request
state
postconviction
relief
shall
counted
toward
period
limitation
aedpa
fact
congress
expressly
referred
tolling
state
collateral
review
proceedings
easily
explained
without
rebutting
presumption
favor
equitable
tolling
petitioner
bring
federal
habeas
claim
without
first
exhausting
state
remedies
process
frequently
takes
longer
one
year
see
rose
lundy
hence
congress
explain
limitations
statute
accounts
time
state
proceedings
pending
special
need
express
provision
undermines
temptation
invoke
interpretive
maxim
inclusio
unius
est
exclusio
alterius
include
one
item
suspension
collateral
review
exclude
similar
items
equitable
tolling
see
young
supra
rejecting
claim
express
tolling
provision
appearing
subsection
limitations
period
demonstrates
statutory
intent
toll
limitations
period
third
finally
disagree
respondent
equitable
tolling
undermines
aedpa
basic
purposes
recognize
aedpa
seeks
eliminate
delays
federal
habeas
review
process
see
day
cockrell
aedpa
seeks
without
undermining
basic
habeas
corpus
principles
seeking
harmonize
new
statute
prior
law
petition
timeliness
always
determined
equitable
principles
see
slack
mcdaniel
aedpa
present
provisions
incorporate
earlier
habeas
corpus
principles
see
also
day
scalia
dissenting
hertz
liebman
federal
habeas
corpus
practice
procedure
pp
ed
congress
codified
new
rules
governing
previously
judicially
managed
area
law
without
losing
sight
fact
writ
habeas
corpus
plays
vital
role
protecting
constitutional
rights
slack
seek
end
every
possible
delay
costs
cf
importance
great
writ
writ
explicitly
protected
constitution
art
cl
along
congressional
efforts
harmonize
new
statute
prior
law
counsels
hesitancy
interpreting
aedpa
statutory
silence
indicating
congressional
intent
close
courthouse
doors
strong
equitable
claim
ordinarily
keep
open
reasons
conclude
neither
aedpa
textual
characteristics
statute
basic
purposes
rebut
basic
presumption
set
forth
irwin
therefore
join
courts
appeals
holding
subject
equitable
tolling
iii
previously
made
clear
petitioner
entitled
equitable
tolling
shows
pursuing
rights
diligently
extraordinary
circumstance
stood
way
prevented
timely
filing
pace
emphasis
deleted
case
extraordinary
circumstances
issue
involve
attorney
failure
satisfy
professional
standards
care
appeals
held
even
attorney
conduct
grossly
negligent
never
warrant
tolling
absent
bad
faith
dishonesty
divided
loyalty
mental
impairment
forth
lawyer
part
view
appeals
standard
rigid
said
courts
equity
must
governed
rules
precedents
less
courts
law
lonchar
thomas
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
also
made
clear
often
exercise
equity
powers
must
made
basis
baggett
bullitt
emphasizing
need
flexibility
avoiding
mechanical
rules
holmberg
armbrecht
followed
tradition
courts
equity
sought
relieve
hardships
time
time
arise
hard
fast
adherence
absolute
legal
rules
strictly
applied
threaten
evils
archaic
rigidity
glass
flexibility
inherent
equitable
procedure
enables
courts
meet
new
situations
demand
equitable
intervention
accord
relief
necessary
correct
particular
injustices
ibid
permitting
postdeadline
filing
bill
review
taken
together
cases
recognize
courts
equity
draw
upon
decisions
made
similar
cases
guidance
courts
exercise
judgment
light
prior
precedent
awareness
fact
specific
circumstances
often
hard
predict
advance
warrant
special
treatment
appropriate
case
recognize
context
procedural
default
previously
stated
without
qualification
petitioner
must
risk
attorney
error
coleman
thompson
coleman
case
federalism
asked
whether
federal
courts
may
excuse
petitioner
failure
comply
state
procedural
rules
notwithstanding
state
determination
rules
violated
equitable
tolling
contrast
asks
whether
federal
courts
may
excuse
petitioner
failure
comply
federal
timing
rules
inquiry
implicate
state
interpretation
state
law
cf
lawrence
ginsburg
dissenting
holland
argue
attorney
misconduct
provides
substantive
ground
relief
cf
case
asks
whether
aedpa
statute
limitations
recognized
cf
day
supra
rather
case
asks
equity
applied
statute
recognized
given
equity
resistance
rigid
rules
read
coleman
requiring
per
se
approach
context
short
rule
law
precedent
demands
rule
like
one
set
forth
eleventh
circuit
case
rule
difficult
reconcile
general
equitable
principles
fails
recognize
least
sometimes
professional
misconduct
fails
meet
eleventh
circuit
standard
nonetheless
amount
egregious
behavior
create
extraordinary
circumstance
warrants
equitable
tolling
given
long
history
judicial
application
equitable
tolling
courts
easily
find
precedents
guide
judgments
several
lower
courts
specifically
held
unprofessional
attorney
conduct
may
certain
circumstances
prove
egregious
extraordinary
even
though
conduct
question
may
satisfy
eleventh
circuit
rule
see
nara
frank
ordering
hearing
whether
client
effectively
abandoned
lawyer
merited
tolling
calderon
allowing
tolling
client
prejudiced
last
minute
change
representation
beyond
control
baldayaque
finding
attorney
failed
perform
essential
service
communicate
client
basic
legal
research
tolling
circumstances
warranted
spitsyn
finding
extraordinary
circumstances
may
warrant
tolling
lawyer
denied
client
access
files
failed
prepare
petition
respond
client
communications
martin
client
entitled
equitable
tolling
attorney
retained
files
made
misleading
statements
engaged
similar
conduct
previously
held
garden
variety
claim
excusable
neglect
irwin
simple
miscalculation
leads
lawyer
miss
filing
deadline
lawrence
supra
warrant
equitable
tolling
case
us
involve
considering
garden
variety
claim
attorney
negligence
rather
facts
case
present
far
serious
instances
attorney
misconduct
said
although
circumstances
case
must
extraordinary
equitable
tolling
applied
hold
circumstances
limited
satisfy
test
appeals
used
case
iv
record
facts
set
forth
part
opinion
suggest
case
may
well
extraordinary
instance
petitioner
attorney
conduct
constituted
far
garden
variety
excusable
neglect
sure
collins
failed
file
holland
petition
time
appears
unaware
date
limitations
period
expired
two
facts
alone
might
suggest
simple
negligence
circumstances
record
facts
elucidated
suggest
failure
amounted
collins
failed
file
holland
federal
petition
time
despite
holland
many
letters
repeatedly
emphasized
importance
collins
apparently
research
necessary
find
proper
filing
date
despite
holland
letters
went
far
identify
applicable
legal
rules
collins
failed
inform
holland
timely
manner
crucial
fact
florida
decided
case
despite
holland
many
pleas
information
collins
failed
communicate
client
period
years
despite
various
pleas
holland
collins
respond
letters
group
teachers
legal
ethics
tells
us
various
failures
violated
fundamental
canons
professional
responsibility
require
attorneys
perform
reasonably
competent
legal
work
communicate
clients
implement
clients
reasonable
requests
keep
clients
informed
key
developments
cases
never
abandon
client
see
brief
legal
ethics
professors
et
al
amici
curiae
describing
ethical
rules
set
forth
case
law
restatements
agency
restatement
third
law
governing
lawyers
aba
model
rules
professional
conduct
case
failures
seriously
prejudiced
client
thereby
lost
likely
single
opportunity
federal
habeas
review
lawfulness
imprisonment
death
sentence
state
conclusion
absolute
form
however
proceedings
may
necessary
district
rested
ruling
lack
extraordinary
circumstances
rather
lack
diligence
ruling
respondent
defend
see
brief
respondent
tr
oral
arg
think
district
conclusion
incorrect
diligence
required
equitable
tolling
purposes
diligence
see
lonchar
maximum
feasible
diligence
starns
andrews
quoting
moore
knight
holland
wrote
attorney
numerous
letters
seeking
crucial
information
providing
direction
also
repeatedly
contacted
state
courts
clerks
florida
state
bar
association
effort
collins
central
impediment
pursuit
legal
remedy
removed
case
day
holland
discovered
aedpa
clock
expired
due
collins
failings
holland
prepared
habeas
petition
pro
se
promptly
filed
district
district
erroneously
relied
lack
diligence
appeals
erroneously
relied
overly
rigid
per
se
approach
lower
yet
considered
detail
facts
case
determine
whether
indeed
constitute
extraordinary
circumstances
sufficient
warrant
equitable
relief
indful
final
review
first
view
adarand
constructors
mineta
per
curiam
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
also
recognize
prudence
faced
equitable
often
inquiry
allowing
lower
courts
undertake
first
instance
gonzalez
crosby
stevens
dissenting
thus
conclude
district
determination
must
set
aside
leave
appeals
determine
whether
facts
record
entitle
holland
equitable
tolling
whether
proceedings
including
evidentiary
hearing
might
indicate
respondent
prevail
judgment
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
albert
holland
petitioner
florida
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
june
justice
alito
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
case
raises
two
broad
questions
first
whether
statute
limitations
set
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
subject
equitable
tolling
second
assuming
affirmative
answer
first
question
whether
petitioner
particular
case
alleged
facts
sufficient
satisfy
extraordinary
circumstances
prong
equitable
tolling
test
agree
conclusion
equitable
tolling
available
aedpa
also
agree
much
discussion
concerning
whether
equitable
tolling
available
facts
particular
case
particular
agree
appeals
erred
essentially
limiting
relevant
inquiry
question
whether
gross
negligence
counsel
may
extraordinary
circumstance
warranting
equitable
tolling
makes
clear
petitioner
case
alleged
certain
facts
go
well
beyond
form
attorney
negligence
see
ante
appeals
appear
asked
whether
particular
facts
provide
independent
basis
tolling
accordingly
concur
decision
reverse
judgment
remand
lower
courts
may
properly
apply
correct
legal
standard
although
agree
appeals
applied
wrong
standard
think
majority
enough
explain
right
standard
course
true
equitable
tolling
requires
extraordinary
circumstances
conclusory
formulation
provide
much
guidance
lower
courts
charged
reviewing
many
habeas
petitions
filed
every
year
therefore
write
separately
set
forth
understanding
principles
governing
availability
equitable
tolling
cases
involving
attorney
misconduct
generally
litigant
seeking
equitable
tolling
bears
burden
establishing
two
elements
pursuing
rights
diligently
extraordinary
circumstance
stood
way
pace
diguglielmo
dispute
case
concerns
whether
attorney
misconduct
amounts
extraordinary
circumstance
stands
petitioner
way
prevents
petitioner
filing
timely
petition
agree
majority
practical
attempt
provide
exhaustive
compilation
kinds
situations
attorney
misconduct
may
provide
basis
equitable
tolling
view
however
useful
note
several
broad
principles
may
distilled
precedents
first
prior
cases
make
abundantly
clear
attorney
negligence
extraordinary
circumstance
warranting
equitable
tolling
lawrence
florida
expressly
rejected
petitioner
contention
counsel
mistake
miscalculating
limitations
period
entitle
equitable
tolling
attorney
miscalculation
held
simply
sufficient
warrant
equitable
tolling
particularly
postconviction
context
prisoners
constitutional
right
counsel
citing
coleman
thompson
emphasis
added
basic
rationale
lawrence
holding
mistakes
counsel
constructively
attributable
client
least
postconviction
context
lawrence
reliance
coleman
instructive
coleman
addressed
whether
attorney
error
provided
cause
procedural
default
based
late
filing
see
constitutional
right
attorney
state
proceedings
explained
petitioner
claim
constitutionally
ineffective
assistance
counsel
proceedings
ibid
circumstances
reasoned
inequity
requiring
petitioner
bear
risk
attorney
error
results
procedural
default
ibid
quoting
murray
carrier
accord
coleman
ause
cause
prejudice
test
must
something
external
petitioner
something
fairly
attributed
ibid
attorney
ignorance
inadvertence
attorney
petitioner
agent
acting
failing
act
furtherance
litigation
petitioner
must
risk
attorney
matters
whether
error
counsel
must
seen
external
factor
ibid
absence
constitutional
violation
petitioner
bears
risk
federal
habeas
attorney
errors
made
course
representation
coleman
right
counsel
pursue
appeal
state
habeas
attorney
error
led
default
coleman
claims
state
constitute
cause
excuse
default
federal
habeas
lawrence
makes
clear
analysis
applies
petitioner
seeks
equitable
tolling
based
attorney
error
postconviction
context
see
citing
coleman
lawrence
addressed
allegation
attorney
miscalculation
rationale
fully
applies
forms
attorney
negligence
instead
miscalculating
filing
deadline
example
attorney
compute
deadline
correctly
forget
file
habeas
petition
time
mail
petition
wrong
address
fail
requisite
research
determine
applicable
deadline
case
however
counsel
error
constructively
attributable
client
second
mere
fact
missed
deadline
involves
gross
negligence
part
counsel
establish
extraordinary
circumstance
explained
principal
rationale
disallowing
equitable
tolling
based
ordinary
attorney
miscalculation
error
attorney
constructively
attributable
client
thus
circumstance
beyond
litigant
control
see
lawrence
supra
coleman
supra
see
also
powell
davis
johnson
mcbride
harris
hutchinson
rationale
plainly
applies
regardless
whether
attorney
error
question
involves
ordinary
gross
negligence
see
coleman
gravity
attorney
error
matters
constitutes
violation
petitioner
right
counsel
error
must
seen
external
factor
rejecting
contention
late
filing
result
attorney
error
sufficient
magnitude
excuse
default
federal
habeas
allowing
equitable
tolling
cases
involving
gross
rather
ordinary
attorney
negligence
fail
make
sense
light
prior
cases
also
impractical
extreme
missing
statute
limitations
generally
always
amount
negligence
see
lawrence
aptly
said
gross
negligence
ordinary
negligence
vituperative
epithet
added
therefore
gross
negligence
may
enough
equitable
tolling
basis
arguing
tolling
appropriate
almost
every
counseled
case
involving
missed
deadline
see
ibid
argument
attorney
miscalculation
extraordinary
circumstance
credited
essentially
equitably
toll
limitations
periods
every
person
whose
attorney
missed
deadline
impose
severe
burden
district
courts
also
make
availability
tolling
turn
highly
artificial
distinction
gross
ordinary
negligence
line
hard
administer
needlessly
consume
scarce
judicial
resources
almost
certainly
yield
inconsistent
often
unsatisfying
results
see
baldayaque
jacobs
concurring
noting
distinction
ordinary
extraordinary
attorney
malpractice
elusive
hard
apply
counterintuitive
finally
worth
noting
rule
distinguishes
ordinary
gross
attorney
negligence
purposes
equitable
tolling
analysis
demonstrably
inequitable
consequences
example
hard
see
habeas
petitioner
effectively
penalized
counsel
negligent
rather
grossly
negligent
state
penalized
petitioner
counsel
grossly
negligent
rather
moderately
negligent
regardless
one
characterizes
counsel
deficient
performance
cases
petitioner
personally
fault
untimely
filing
attorney
error
cause
late
filing
governmental
interest
enforcing
statutory
limitations
period
ii
although
attorney
negligence
however
styled
provide
basis
equitable
tolling
aedpa
statute
limitations
may
tolled
missed
deadline
results
attorney
misconduct
constructively
attributable
petitioner
case
petitioner
alleges
facts
amount
misconduct
see
ante
acknowledging
ordinary
attorney
negligence
warrant
equitable
tolling
observing
facts
case
present
far
serious
instances
attorney
misconduct
particular
alleges
attorney
essentially
abandoned
evidenced
counsel
failure
communicate
petitioner
respond
petitioner
many
inquiries
requests
period
several
years
see
ante
petitioner
also
appears
allege
made
reasonable
efforts
terminate
counsel
due
inadequate
representation
proceed
pro
se
efforts
successfully
opposed
state
perverse
ground
petitioner
failed
act
appointed
counsel
see
ante
brief
petitioner
stating
petitioner
filed
two
pro
se
motions
florida
remove
collins
counsel
one
granted
allowed
petitioner
proceed
pro
se
emphasis
deleted
true
petitioner
allegations
suffice
establish
extraordinary
circumstances
beyond
control
common
sense
dictates
litigant
held
constructively
responsible
conduct
attorney
operating
agent
meaningful
sense
word
see
coleman
supra
relying
principles
agency
law
determine
whether
attorney
error
attributable
client
baldayaque
supra
jacobs
concurring
hen
acts
manner
completely
adverse
principal
interest
charged
agent
particularly
litigant
reasonable
efforts
terminate
attorney
representation
thwarted
forces
wholly
beyond
petitioner
control
appeals
apparently
consider
petitioner
abandonment
argument
assess
whether
state
improperly
prevented
petitioner
either
obtaining
new
representation
assuming
responsibility
representing
accordingly
agree
majority
appropriate
disposition
reverse
remand
lower
courts
may
apply
correct
standard
facts
alleged
albert
holland
petitioner
florida
writ
certiorari
appeals
eleventh
circuit
june
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
joins
part
dissenting
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
establishes
limitations
period
state
prisoners
seek
federal
habeas
relief
subject
several
specific
exceptions
concludes
time
limit
also
subject
equitable
tolling
even
attorney
errors
ordinarily
attributable
client
rejects
appeals
conclusion
albert
holland
entitled
tolling
without
explaining
test
applied
wrong
rule
applied
instead
view
leaves
room
equitable
exceptions
holland
qualify
even
correct
ante
ordinarily
presume
federal
limitations
periods
subject
equitable
tolling
unless
tolling
inconsistent
statute
young
especially
true
limitations
provisions
applicable
actions
traditionally
governed
equitable
principles
category
includes
habeas
proceedings
see
merely
created
limitations
period
federal
habeas
applicants
agree
applying
equitable
tolling
appropriate
much
establishing
detailed
scheme
regarding
filing
deadline
addresses
array
contingencies
ordinary
case
clock
starts
judgment
becomes
final
direct
review
statute
delays
start
date
thus
effectively
tolling
limitations
period
cases
state
action
unlawfully
impeded
prisoner
filing
habeas
application
prisoner
asserts
constitutional
right
newly
recognized
made
retroactive
collateral
cases
factual
predicate
prisoner
claim
previously
discovered
due
diligence
also
expressly
tolls
limitations
period
pendency
properly
filed
application
state
collateral
relief
congress
short
considered
accounted
specific
circumstances
view
excuse
applicant
delay
question
therefore
whether
time
bar
subject
tolling
whether
consistent
federal
courts
toll
time
bar
additional
reasons
beyond
congress
included
view
fair
enough
infer
statute
limitations
says
nothing
equitable
tolling
congress
displace
default
rule
congress
codified
default
rule
specified
instances
applies
warrant
extend
cases
see
beggerly
unless
believes
contains
implicit
exception
subsumes
thus
renders
unnecessary
must
rely
untenable
assumption
congress
enumerated
events
toll
limitations
period
indication
list
merely
illustrative
implicitly
authorized
courts
add
others
see
fit
assume
opposite
specifying
situations
equitable
principle
applies
specific
requirement
congress
displaced
courts
discretion
develop
ad
hoc
exceptions
cf
lonchar
thomas
responses
unpersuasive
brushes
aside
apparently
subdivisions
merely
delay
start
limitations
period
suspend
limitations
period
already
underway
ante
explain
distinction
makes
described
rule
forestalls
start
limitations
period
effectively
allow
ing
equitable
tolling
beggerly
supra
address
undeniably
provides
poststart
tolling
dismisses
basis
congress
resolve
contradiction
time
bar
rule
rose
lundy
federal
habeas
application
filed
state
proceedings
pending
contradiction
resolve
unless
absence
statutory
tolling
provision
equitable
tolling
apply
state
prisoner
barred
filing
federal
habeas
application
exhausts
state
remedies
offers
reason
holding
young
tolling
justified
government
inability
pursue
claim
bankruptcy
code
automatic
stay
suggests
ii
even
left
room
equitable
tolling
situations
tolling
surely
excuse
delay
equitable
tolling
available
held
litigant
entitled
diligently
pursued
rights
requirement
relevant
extraordinary
circumstance
stood
way
lawrence
florida
quoting
pace
diguglielmo
attorney
litigant
agent
attorney
acts
failures
act
within
scope
representation
treated
client
see
link
wabash
thus
acts
failures
act
necessarily
extraordinary
circumstances
sure
rule
attorney
acts
oversights
attributable
client
relaxed
client
constitutional
right
effective
assistance
counsel
state
constitutionally
obliged
provide
attorney
fails
provide
effective
one
attorney
failures
fall
standard
set
forth
strickland
washington
chargeable
state
prisoner
see
murray
carrier
client
right
counsel
habeas
proceedings
rule
holding
responsible
attorney
acts
applies
full
force
see
coleman
thompson
thus
state
habeas
petitioner
appeal
filed
late
attorney
error
petitioner
luck
less
proceeded
pro
se
neglected
file
appeal
congress
course
included
errors
habeas
counsel
basis
delaying
limitations
period
oversight
section
expressly
allows
tolling
impediments
prevent
prisoner
filing
application
impediment
violates
constitution
federal
law
doubt
equitable
tolling
unavailable
excuse
attorney
error
eliminated
lawrence
petitioner
asserted
attorney
miscalculation
limitations
period
federal
habeas
applications
caused
miss
filing
deadline
attorney
error
stemmed
mistaken
belief
contrary
circuit
precedent
approved
lawrence
limitations
period
tolled
pendency
petition
certiorari
state
postconviction
proceeding
see
also
brief
petitioner
lawrence
florida
pp
assuming
arguendo
equitable
tolling
ever
apply
held
attorney
error
warrant
especially
since
petitioner
constitutionally
entitled
counsel
lawrence
supra
faithful
application
lawrence
make
short
work
holland
claim
although
holland
alleges
wide
array
misconduct
counsel
bradley
collins
pertinent
part
appears
extremely
similar
identical
attorney
error
lawrence
relevant
time
period
extends
november
florida
affirmed
denial
holland
state
habeas
december
latest
date
limitations
period
within
period
collins
alerted
holland
florida
decision
either
collins
holland
filed
timely
federal
habeas
application
collins
instead
filed
petition
certiorari
several
months
later
collins
notify
holland
file
timely
federal
application
unclear
none
plausible
explanations
support
equitable
tolling
far
likely
explanation
collins
made
exactly
mistake
attorney
lawrence
assumed
incorrectly
pendency
petition
certiorari
seeking
review
denial
holland
state
habeas
petition
toll
aedpa
time
bar
december
collins
explained
holland
letter
state
habeas
petition
denied
denied
certiorari
proceeding
holland
claims
ripe
presentation
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
federal
app
emphasis
added
holland
interprets
statement
proof
time
collins
belief
holland
time
file
federal
habeas
petition
continue
tolled
denied
certiorari
state
postconviction
proceeding
pet
cert
misunderstanding
entirely
account
collins
conduct
filing
certiorari
petition
instead
habeas
application
waiting
nearly
three
months
also
insufficient
lawrence
held
warrant
tolling
conceivable
explanations
collins
failure
fare
better
may
collins
believed
explained
holland
january
letter
holland
informed
certiorari
petition
state
postconviction
proceeding
stop
clock
certiorari
petition
holland
direct
appeal
also
toll
time
bar
consequently
collins
wrote
holland
time
file
federal
application
expired
even
collins
appointed
app
explains
ante
view
wrong
basis
equitable
tolling
attorney
misunderstanding
lawrence
may
collins
despite
wrote
holland
correctly
understood
rule
simply
neglected
notify
holland
perhaps
missed
state
ruling
mail
perhaps
simply
slipped
mind
oversight
unfortunate
amounts
garden
variety
negligence
basis
equitable
tolling
irwin
department
veterans
affairs
surely
extraordinary
attorney
error
lawrence
rudimentary
research
arithmetic
avoided
insists
collins
misconduct
goes
beyond
neglect
miscalculation
ante
differences
identifies
effect
holland
ability
file
federal
application
time
highlights
collins
nonresponsiveness
holland
state
postconviction
motions
still
pending
ante
even
taken
face
value
collins
silence
prior
november
prevent
holland
filing
timely
federal
application
florida
courts
finished
case
also
appears
think
significant
collins
correspondence
holland
january
limitations
period
elapsed
ante
unless
holland
establish
tolled
due
events
december
misconduct
collins
limitations
period
elapsed
irrelevant
even
collins
conduct
november
december
extraordinary
holland
shown
stood
way
prevented
timely
filing
lawrence
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
part
holland
asserts
collins
merely
forget
keep
client
informed
deliberately
deceived
appeals
concluded
however
holland
allege
deception
seeking
equitable
tolling
see
per
curiam
event
deception
complains
consists
collins
assurance
early
representation
protect
holland
ability
assert
claims
federal
see
app
coupled
collins
later
failure
course
amount
deception
holland
offers
evidence
collins
meant
mislead
moreover
holland
hardly
claim
caught
guard
collins
failures
respond
holland
repeated
requests
information
state
ruled
gave
holland
even
greater
reason
suspect
collins
fallen
asleep
switch
holland
indeed
illusion
contrary
repeated
efforts
replace
collins
despite
insistence
lawrence
control
case
actually
hold
holland
entitled
equitable
tolling
concludes
eleventh
circuit
applied
wrong
rule
remands
case
appropriate
identified
legal
error
eleventh
circuit
analysis
set
forth
proper
standard
applied
neither
rejects
rigid
ante
eleventh
circuit
test
requires
beyond
ordinary
attorney
negligence
allegation
proof
bad
faith
dishonesty
divided
loyalty
mental
impairment
forth
lawyer
part
never
explains
forth
test
explicitly
leaves
room
kinds
egregious
attorney
error
insufficiently
elastic
moreover
even
eleventh
circuit
adopted
entirely
inflexible
rule
simply
untrue
appears
believe
ante
general
rules
ipso
facto
incompatible
equity
rejected
canard
see
grupo
mexicano
de
desarrollo
alliance
bond
fund
relied
existence
general
rules
regarding
equitable
tolling
particular
see
young
observed
rejecting
ad
hoc
equitable
restrictions
habeas
relief
alternative
use
equity
chancellor
conscience
measure
equity
alternative
arbitrary
uncertain
measuring
distance
length
chancellor
foot
lonchar
consistent
failure
explain
error
eleventh
circuit
test
offers
almost
clue
test
applied
unhelpfully
advises
appeals
test
narrow
explanation
besides
assertion
test
left
cases
tolling
might
warranted
precise
indication
cases
might
ante
least
sometimes
professional
misconduct
fails
meet
eleventh
circuit
standard
nonetheless
amount
egregious
behavior
create
extraordinary
circumstance
warrants
equitable
tolling
says
courts
easily
find
precedents
guide
judgments
citing
several
appeals
opinions
various
contexts
permit
tolling
attorney
error
notably
omitting
opinions
disallow
seventh
circuit
opinion
powell
davis
guide
judgmen
precisely
arrived
ttorney
misconduct
whether
labeled
negligent
grossly
negligent
willful
attributable
client
thus
circumstance
beyond
petitioner
control
might
excuse
untimely
petition
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
thing
offers
approaches
substantive
instruction
implicit
approval
fundamental
canons
professional
responsibility
articulated
ad
hoc
group
amici
consisting
mainly
professors
least
analytically
rigorous
hence
subjective
subjects
legal
ethics
ante
even
try
justify
importing
equity
prevailing
professional
norms
held
implicit
right
counsel
strickland
habeas
action
holland
right
counsel
object
transparent
attempt
smuggle
strickland
realm
sixth
amendment
reach
refusal
articulate
intelligible
rule
regarding
issue
actually
us
stands
sharp
contrast
insistence
deciding
issue
us
whether
holland
satisfied
second
prerequisite
equitable
tolling
demonstrating
pursued
rights
diligently
see
pace
admits
district
addressed
question
eleventh
circuit
need
reach
importantly
even
arguably
included
within
question
presented
concerns
whether
attorney
gross
negligence
constitute
extraordinary
circumstance
kind
held
essential
equitable
tolling
pet
cert
whether
tolling
ever
available
fairly
included
question
whether
holland
overcome
additional
independent
hurdle
tolling
offers
justification
deciding
distinct
issue
closest
comes
observation
state
defend
district
ruling
regarding
diligence
ante
state
reason
reason
address
merits
holland
habeas
claims
contrary
implication
state
conceded
issue
state
brief
cites
opposite
observing
prong
test
issue
state
perhaps
astutely
apprehensive
might
ignore
fact
added
extent
considers
matter
holland
diligence
respondent
relies
findings
district
brief
respondent
also
cites
statement
state
counsel
oral
argument
tr
oral
arg
holland
counsel
characterization
concession
remark
context
shows
state
dispute
diligence
issue
extraordinary
circumstances
well
goes
issue
diligence
course
issue
looking
looking
extraordinary
circumstances
diligence
concede
diligence
moment
notwithstanding
confidence
district
wrong
even
clear
holland
acted
requisite
diligence
although
holland
repeatedly
contacted
collins
state
courts
reasonable
measures
holland
pursued
example
suggested
pace
supra
decided
holland
state
habeas
petition
still
pending
holland
might
filed
federal
habeas
application
asked
district
stay
federal
action
state
proceedings
concluded
also
presumably
checked
records
prison
writ
room
eventually
learned
state
decision
regular
basis
sought
permission
state
courts
proceed
pro
se
thus
remove
collins
say
district
correct
conclude
holland
diligent
answer
obvious
make
seem
impulse
intervene
litigant
lawyer
made
mistakes
understandable
temptation
tinker
technical
rules
achieve
appears
result
often
strong
especially
client
faces
capital
sentence
constitution
empower
federal
courts
rewrite
name
equity
rules
congress
made
endowing
unelected
judges
power
irreconcilable
system
literally
place
whole
rights
property
community
arbitrary
judge
arming
despotic
sovereign
authority
story
commentaries
equity
jurisprudence
ed
danger
doubled
disregard
precedent
leaving
consciences
constrain
discretion
statute
stare
decisis
foreclose
holland
claim
respectfully
dissent
footnotes
title
provides
period
limitation
shall
apply
application
writ
habeas
corpus
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
limitation
period
shall
run
latest
date
judgment
became
final
conclusion
direct
review
expiration
time
seeking
review
date
impediment
filing
application
created
state
action
violation
constitution
laws
removed
applicant
prevented
filing
state
action
date
constitutional
right
asserted
initially
recognized
right
newly
recognized
made
retroactively
applicable
cases
collateral
review
date
factual
predicate
claim
claims
presented
discovered
exercise
due
diligence
time
properly
filed
application
state
collateral
review
respect
pertinent
judgment
claim
pending
shall
counted
toward
period
limitation
subsection
cites
several
appeals
cases
support
distinction
ante
case
clay
described
containing
triggers
limitations
period
distinguish
delaying
start
limitations
period
tolling
appeals
cases
cites
cada
baxter
healthcare
wolin
smith
barney
wims
rely
distinction
accrual
rules
tolling
since
disregarded
see
trw
andrews
reads
young
support
disregarding
specific
tolling
provisions
congress
included
ante
pertinent
passage
young
explained
inclusion
express
tolling
rule
different
provision
regarding
different
limitations
period
ii
ed
albeit
provision
within
subparagraph
provision
issue
rebut
presumption
equitable
tolling
see
moreover
young
stressed
ii
authorized
tolling
instances
equity
allowed
reinforced
presumption
favor
tolling
ibid
suggest
exceptions
go
beyond
equity
allowed
dismisses
coleman
case
federalism
therefore
inapposite
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
fail
see
federalism
concerns
implicated
ad
hoc
exceptions
statute
limitations
attempts
overturn
convictions
event
coleman
invent
merely
applied
already
established
principle
attorney
acts
client
see
holland
counsel
appointed
rather
like
counsel
coleman
retained
see
brief
respondent
coleman
thompson
pp
irrelevant
sixth
amendment
right
effective
assistance
counsel
held
applies
even
attorney
defendant
hires
see
cuyler
sullivan
basis
coleman
coleman
hired
counsel
state
owed
obligation
provide
one
see
utterly
perverse
course
penalize
state
providing
habeas
petitioners
representation
state
avoid
equitable
tolling
providing
none
florida
issue
mandate
limitations
period
resume
see
lawrence
december
florida
issued
decision
mandate
still
come
collins
notified
holland
turn
filed
pro
se
federal
application
parties
dispute
holland
state
habeas
petition
filed
thus
limitations
period
expired
brief
petitioner
brief
respondent
discrepancy
immaterial
give
holland
benefit
doubt
holland
insists
allege
deception
see
brief
petitioner
cites
conclusory
allegation
unrelated
motion
motion
appointment
new
counsel
see
app
reply
state
response
order
show
cause
drafted
new
counsel
allege
deception
record
doc
concurrence
argues
holland
allegations
suffice
show
true
collins
essentially
holland
failing
respond
holland
inquiries
therefore
ceased
act
holland
agent
ante
alito
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
collins
failure
communicate
bearing
unless
ended
agency
relationship
relevant
window
concurrence
explain
contend
example
collins
conduct
amounted
disloyalty
renunciation
role
terminate
collins
authority
see
restatement
second
agency
collins
alleged
nonresponsiveness
help
holland
cause
adverse
holland
interest
beyond
holland
control
ante
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
thus
basis
holding
holland
harmless
consequences
counsel
conduct
attorney
mistakes
cf
irwin
department
veterans
affairs
concurrence
also
relies
upon
holland
requests
replace
collins
new
appointed
counsel
requests
prevent
imputing
collins
acts
holland
every
habeas
applicant
unsuccessfully
asks
new
lawyer
seek
proceed
pro
se
request
denied
bound
attorney
subsequent
acts
holland
made
many
pro
se
filings
state
stricken
holland
still
represented
sought
new
counsel
appointed
collins
place
seek
proceed
pro
se
dispute
holland
asserts
one
pro
se
motions
filed
granted
entitled
proceed
pro
se
see
brief
petitioner
assertion
appears
made
district
see
record
doc
concurrence
equates
assertion
allegation
actually
sought
litigate
case
behalf
ante
filing
holland
refers
see
brief
petitioner
like
earlier
filings
requested
collins
replaced
new
counsel
app
motion
also
asked
hearing
pursuant
nelson
state
app
show
collins
poor
performance
app
amount
request
proceed
pro
se
nelson
held
defendant
facing
trial
seeks
discharge
counsel
ineffectiveness
entitled
hearing
determine
new
counsel
required
defendant
fails
make
showing
continues
demand
dismissal
appointed
counsel
nelson
explained
trial
judge
may
discretion
discharge
counsel
require
defendant
proceed
trial
without
representation
appointed
counsel
ibid
see
also
hardwick
state
reason
requesting
procedure
state
habeas
proceedings
construed
request
proceed
pro
se
holland
unlike
defendant
still
facing
trial
need
permission
fire
collins
since
right
representation
waive
request
new
attorney
denied
holland
informed
collins
services
longer
required