lonchar
thomas
argued
december
decided
april
petitioner
lonchar
sentenced
death
murder
nine
years
ago
years
following
affirmance
conviction
sentence
sister
brother
filed
next
friend
state
habeas
petitions
lonchar
opposed
lonchar
filed
dismissed
state
habeas
petition
shortly
scheduled
execution
filed
another
state
habeas
petition
denied
filed
eleventh
hour
federal
petition
first
reasoning
federal
habeas
corpus
rule
generalized
equitable
authority
dismiss
governed
case
district
held
lonchar
conduct
waiting
almost
six
years
file
federal
petition
constitute
independent
basis
rejecting
petition
granted
stay
permit
time
consideration
grounds
dismissal
raised
state
appeals
vacated
stay
held
equitable
doctrines
independent
rule
applied
relying
chiefly
per
curiam
order
gomez
dist
northern
dist
setting
aside
rules
traditional
habeas
doctrines
concluded
lonchar
merit
equitable
relief
held
principle
barefoot
estelle
applies
district
faced
request
stay
first
federal
habeas
case
district
dismiss
petition
merits
scheduled
execution
obligated
address
merits
must
issue
stay
prevent
case
becoming
moot
lacks
authority
directly
dispose
petition
merits
abuse
discretion
attempting
achieve
result
indirectly
denying
stay
since
lonchar
claims
certainly
seem
substantial
enough
prevent
page
ii
dismissal
habeas
corpus
rule
state
argue
contrary
courts
correctly
assumed
denied
stay
unless
petition
properly
subject
dismissal
gomez
order
displaced
barefoot
rationale
one
permitting
denial
stay
first
federal
habeas
cases
even
district
lacks
authority
dismiss
petition
merits
gomez
involve
denial
stay
case
lower
authority
dismiss
petition
first
habeas
petition
neither
discussed
cited
barefoot
much
less
repudiated
rationale
pp
appeals
erred
dismissing
lonchar
first
federal
petition
special
ad
hoc
equitable
reasons
encompassed
within
relevant
statutes
federal
habeas
corpus
rules
prior
precedents
first
history
great
writ
reveals
individual
judges
dismissing
writs
ad
hoc
reasons
rather
gradual
evolution
formal
judicial
statutory
doctrines
law
regularize
thereby
narrow
discretion
individual
judges
freely
exercise
see
mccleskey
zant
second
fact
writ
called
equitable
remedy
see
gomez
supra
authorize
ignore
body
statutes
rules
precedents
rather
courts
equity
must
governed
rules
precedents
less
courts
law
missouri
jenkins
thomas
concurring
arguments
ad
hoc
departure
settled
rules
seem
particularly
strong
dismissal
first
habeas
petition
issue
since
dismissal
denies
petitioner
protections
great
writ
entirely
see
ex
parte
yerger
wall
third
rule
permits
courts
dismiss
habeas
petition
appears
state
prejudiced
ability
respond
delay
petition
filing
specifically
directly
addresses
delay
factor
led
appeals
dismiss
lonchar
petition
district
asked
make
finding
prejudice
case
whereas
rule
history
makes
plain
prejudice
requirement
represents
critical
element
balancing
interests
undertaken
congress
rule
framers
courts
may
undermine
exercise
background
equitable
powers
see
bank
nova
scotia
fourth
contrary
appeals
view
gomez
supra
authorize
ad
hoc
equitable
departures
habeas
corpus
rules
purport
work
significant
change
law
applicable
dismissal
first
habeas
petitions
fifth
fact
lonchar
filed
petition
eleventh
hour
lead
different
page
iii
conclusion
gomez
supra
sawyer
whitley
distinguished
complexity
inherent
developing
fair
effective
rules
minimize
harms
created
petitions
capital
cases
offers
practical
caution
judicial
attempt
outside
framework
habeas
rules
fashion
reforms
concerning
first
federal
habeas
petitions
sixth
different
result
warranted
special
circumstances
case
including
next
friend
petitions
filed
lonchar
siblings
filing
later
withdrawal
state
habeas
petition
fact
motive
filing
federal
habeas
petition
part
delay
execution
expresses
view
proper
outcome
rules
application
case
pp
breyer
delivered
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
joined
rehnquist
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
scalia
kennedy
thomas
joined
lonchar
thomas
justice
breyer
delivered
opinion
case
asks
us
decide
whether
federal
may
dismiss
first
federal
habeas
petition
general
equitable
reasons
beyond
embodied
relevant
statutes
federal
habeas
corpus
rules
prior
precedents
decide
appeals
erred
case
primary
equitable
consideration
favoring
dismissal
eleventh
hour
petition
us
serious
delay
federal
habeas
corpus
rule
deals
specifically
delay
see
rule
permitting
courts
dismiss
habeas
petition
appears
state
prejudiced
ability
respond
delay
filing
view
rule
general
equitable
power
create
exceptions
rule
determined
whether
petition
dismissal
appropriate
petitioner
larry
lonchar
sentenced
death
murder
nine
years
ago
filed
eleventh
hour
petition
habeas
corpus
first
federal
habeas
corpus
petition
june
day
scheduled
execution
understand
procedural
significance
petition
lonchar
thomas
nature
delay
issue
relevant
special
features
case
must
consider
petition
context
earlier
proceedings
ease
exposition
divide
five
stages
stage
one
trial
appeal
execution
date
lonchar
convicted
state
murdering
three
people
sentenced
death
electrocution
mandatory
state
appeal
led
affirmance
conviction
sentence
trial
judge
issued
death
warrant
week
march
throughout
proceedings
lonchar
said
wanted
die
refused
cooperate
lawyer
attend
trial
also
attempted
unsuccessfully
waive
mandatory
appeal
declined
authorize
collateral
attacks
conviction
sentence
wrote
trial
judge
asking
execution
date
stage
two
sister
next
friend
habeas
march
two
days
scheduled
execution
lonchar
sister
chris
kellog
filed
next
friend
habeas
petition
state
claiming
lonchar
incompetent
lonchar
opposed
action
eventually
state
federal
courts
trial
appellate
levels
held
lonchar
competent
dismissed
petition
state
courts
issued
death
warrant
time
week
february
stage
three
lonchar
state
habeas
february
lonchar
lawyer
told
brother
milan
threatening
kill
lonchar
execution
lonchar
authorized
habeas
petition
state
obtained
stay
execution
subsequently
changed
mind
told
judge
want
proceed
although
lawyers
objected
lonchar
incompetent
make
decision
judge
dismissed
petition
without
prejudice
death
warrant
issued
week
june
lonchar
thomas
stage
four
brother
next
friend
habeas
june
three
days
scheduled
execution
lonchar
brother
milan
filed
another
next
friend
habeas
petition
state
lonchar
opposed
within
three
days
milan
petition
met
fate
sister
earlier
petition
say
federal
state
courts
trial
appellate
levels
found
lonchar
competent
denied
petition
stage
five
lonchar
current
habeas
june
immediately
thereafter
discussions
lawyers
lonchar
filed
another
state
habeas
petition
containing
claims
including
one
challenged
method
execution
told
state
judge
wished
pursue
claims
litigating
delay
execution
hope
state
change
execution
method
lethal
injection
donate
organs
state
courts
stayed
execution
briefly
two
days
later
denied
petition
lonchar
immediately
filed
first
federal
habeas
petition
set
forth
claims
state
asked
lonchar
federal
petition
dismissed
stressing
called
lonchar
inequitable
conduct
waiting
almost
six
years
last
minute
file
federal
habeas
petition
district
held
constitute
independent
basis
rejecting
petition
view
habeas
corpus
rule
generalized
equitable
authority
dismiss
governed
case
held
rule
authority
dismiss
abuse
writ
applied
second
successive
habeas
petitions
first
petition
lonchar
see
habeas
corpus
rule
second
successive
petition
may
dismissed
judge
finds
failure
petitioner
assert
grounds
prior
petition
constituted
abuse
writ
emphasis
added
district
therefore
granted
stay
permit
time
consideration
state
grounds
lonchar
thomas
motion
dismiss
next
day
appeals
eleventh
circuit
vacated
stay
pointed
district
based
holding
exclusively
rule
held
equitable
doctrines
independent
rule
applied
relying
chiefly
per
curiam
order
gomez
dist
northern
dist
setting
aside
rules
traditional
habeas
doctrines
concluded
circumstances
case
lonchar
merit
equitable
relief
ibid
mentioned
granted
certiorari
order
consider
whether
federal
may
circumstances
dismiss
valid
first
habeas
petition
equitable
reasons
reasons
listed
federal
statutes
rules
well
established
precedents
ii
first
discuss
preliminary
matter
us
appeals
order
vacates
stay
order
dismiss
habeas
petition
believe
however
fact
makes
difference
appeals
order
vacating
stay
lawful
dismissal
petition
lawful
bringing
lonchar
execution
vacating
stay
prevent
courts
considering
petition
merits
dismissal
previously
considered
slightly
different
context
whether
may
allow
first
federal
habeas
petition
mooted
execution
even
though
lacked
authority
dispose
petition
merits
barefoot
estelle
considered
proper
standard
granting
denying
stay
pending
consideration
appeal
dismissal
first
federal
lonchar
thomas
habeas
petition
stated
certificate
probable
cause
issued
district
case
later
appeals
petitioner
must
afforded
opportunity
address
merits
appeals
obligated
decide
merits
appeal
accordingly
appeals
necessary
prevent
case
becoming
moot
petitioner
execution
grant
stay
execution
pending
disposition
appeal
condemned
prisoner
obtains
certificate
probable
cause
initial
habeas
appeal
case
lonchar
claims
certainly
seem
substantial
enough
prevent
dismissal
rule
state
argue
contrary
believe
district
lonchar
thomas
appeals
correct
assume
lonchar
denied
stay
unless
petition
properly
subject
dismissal
see
app
concurrence
argues
decision
gomez
dist
northern
dist
displaced
rationale
barefoot
relying
particularly
statement
may
consider
nature
application
stay
execution
deciding
whether
grant
equitable
relief
concurrence
understands
statement
authorize
denial
stay
generalized
equitable
reasons
first
federal
habeas
cases
even
district
lacks
authority
dismiss
petition
merits
believe
sentence
rest
order
gomez
supports
conclusion
first
gomez
involve
denial
stay
case
lower
authority
dismiss
petition
instead
concurrence
concedes
post
case
dismissed
abuse
writ
see
second
gomez
involved
fifth
attempt
secure
collateral
review
first
habeas
petition
barefoot
indicated
stays
econd
successive
federal
habeas
corpus
petitions
present
different
issue
since
cases
likely
condemned
inmate
might
attempt
use
repeated
petitions
appeals
mere
delaying
tactic
danger
specially
recognized
addressed
habeas
corpus
rules
barefoot
supra
finally
concurrence
reading
gomez
seriously
conflicts
barefoot
treatment
first
habeas
petitions
decline
adopt
interpretation
per
curiam
order
especially
since
gomez
concern
first
habeas
petition
since
gomez
order
discuss
even
cite
barefoot
much
less
lonchar
thomas
explicitly
repudiate
rationale
iii
turn
main
question
appeals
properly
dismiss
first
habeas
petition
special
ad
hoc
equitable
reasons
encompassed
within
framework
rule
conclude
first
history
great
writ
habeas
corpus
reveals
individual
judges
dismissing
writs
ad
hoc
reasons
rather
gradual
evolution
formal
judicial
statutory
doctrines
law
see
mccleskey
zant
barefoot
supra
kuhlmann
wilson
plurality
opinion
sanders
townsend
sain
earlier
times
courts
followed
comparatively
simple
rules
even
occasionally
disregarding
complex
procedural
doctrines
res
judicata
see
mccleskey
supra
exercised
writ
light
basic
purpose
avoiding
serious
abuses
power
government
say
king
imprisonment
individual
without
referring
matter
see
yackle
postconviction
remedies
pp
duker
constitutional
history
habeas
corpus
church
treatise
writ
habeas
corpus
pp
ed
writ
evolved
instrument
demands
conviction
competent
jurisdiction
see
coy
also
application
basic
constitutional
doctrines
fairness
see
jones
cunningham
congress
rule
writers
courts
developed
complex
procedural
principles
regularize
thereby
narrow
discretion
individual
judges
freely
exercise
principles
seek
maintain
courts
freedom
lonchar
thomas
issue
writ
aptly
described
highest
safeguard
liberty
smith
bennett
time
avoiding
serious
improper
delay
expense
complexity
interference
state
interest
finality
legal
processes
withrow
williams
concurring
part
dissenting
part
mccleskey
supra
reed
ross
legal
principles
embodied
statutes
rules
precedents
practices
control
writ
exercise
within
constitutional
constraints
reflect
balancing
objectives
sometimes
controversial
normally
congress
make
courts
make
congress
resolved
question
see
brecht
abrahamson
second
fact
writ
called
equitable
remedy
see
gomez
supra
authorize
ignore
body
statutes
rules
precedents
thing
law
writs
grace
favour
issuing
judges
opinion
writ
habeas
corpus
wilm
eng
wilmot
rather
courts
equity
must
governed
rules
precedents
less
courts
law
missouri
jenkins
slip
thomas
concurring
see
also
albemarle
paper
moody
federalist
cooke
ed
selden
pointed
many
years
ago
alternative
use
equity
chancellor
conscience
measure
equity
alternative
arbitrary
uncertain
measuring
distance
length
chancellor
foot
see
story
commentaries
equity
jurisprudence
ed
mccleskey
said
concern
habeas
petition
abuses
led
complex
evolving
body
equitable
lonchar
thomas
principles
informed
controlled
historical
usage
statutory
developments
judicial
decisions
emphasis
added
mccleskey
also
reaffirmed
importance
order
preclude
individualized
enforcement
constitution
different
parts
nation
lay
ing
specifically
nature
problem
permits
standards
directions
govern
district
judges
disposition
applications
habeas
corpus
prisoners
sentence
state
courts
quoting
brown
allen
opinion
frankfurter
equitable
rules
guide
lower
courts
reduce
uncertainty
avoid
unfair
surprise
minimize
disparate
treatment
similar
cases
thereby
help
litigants
including
state
whose
interests
finality
rules
often
see
barefoot
kuhlmann
supra
townsend
supra
see
also
coleman
thompson
barring
consideration
claims
procedurally
defaulted
state
absent
cause
prejudice
fundamental
miscarriage
justice
teague
lane
plurality
opinion
barring
habeas
proceedings
federal
claims
based
certain
new
rules
constitutional
law
rose
lundy
district
must
dismiss
habeas
petitions
containing
unexhausted
exhausted
claims
arguments
ad
hoc
departure
settled
rules
seem
particularly
strong
dismissal
first
habeas
petition
issue
dismissal
first
federal
habeas
petition
particularly
serious
matter
dismissal
denies
petitioner
protections
great
writ
entirely
risking
injury
important
interest
human
liberty
see
ex
parte
yerger
wall
writ
lonchar
thomas
centuries
esteemed
best
sufficient
defence
personal
freedom
withrow
supra
concurring
part
dissenting
part
decisions
involving
limitation
habeas
relief
warrant
restraint
even
context
second
successive
petitions
pose
greater
threat
state
interests
finality
less
likely
lead
discovery
unconstitutional
punishments
created
careful
rules
dismissal
petitions
abuse
writ
see
mccleskey
supra
say
district
discretion
dealing
first
federal
habeas
petitions
habeas
corpus
rules
provide
district
courts
ample
discretionary
authority
tailor
proceedings
dispose
quickly
efficiently
fairly
first
habeas
petitions
lack
substantial
merit
preserving
extensive
proceedings
petitions
raising
serious
questions
instance
noted
rules
permit
district
dismiss
summarily
first
petition
without
waiting
state
response
plainly
appears
face
petition
exhibits
annexed
petitioner
entitled
relief
habeas
corpus
rule
moreover
even
petition
dismissed
standard
district
still
authorized
take
action
judge
deems
appropriate
ibid
advisory
committee
note
makes
clear
provision
designed
afford
judge
flexibility
case
either
dismissal
order
answer
may
inappropriate
example
judge
may
want
authorize
respondent
make
motion
dismiss
based
upon
information
furnished
respondent
may
show
petitioner
claims
already
decided
merits
federal
petitioner
failed
exhaust
state
remedies
lonchar
thomas
petitioner
custody
within
meaning
decision
matter
pending
state
situations
dismissal
may
called
procedural
grounds
may
avoid
burdening
respondent
necessity
filing
answer
substantive
merits
petition
situations
judge
may
want
consider
motion
respondent
make
petition
certain
judge
may
want
dismiss
allegations
petition
requiring
respondent
answer
claims
appear
arguable
merit
third
specific
federal
habeas
corpus
rule
rule
directly
addresses
primary
factor
delay
led
appeals
dismiss
petition
equitable
reasons
rule
says
delayed
petitions
petition
may
dismissed
lonchar
thomas
appears
state
respondent
officer
prejudiced
ability
respond
petition
delay
filing
unless
petitioner
shows
based
grounds
knowledge
exercise
reasonable
diligence
circumstances
prejudicial
state
occurred
habeas
corpus
rule
emphasis
added
history
rule
makes
plain
prejudice
requirement
represents
critical
element
balancing
interests
undertaken
congress
framers
rule
courts
may
undermine
exercise
background
equitable
powers
see
bank
nova
scotia
balance
struck
rule
societal
costs
rights
accused
may
casually
overlooked
elected
analyze
question
supervisory
power
quoting
payner
advisory
committee
note
indicates
maxim
upon
appeals
relied
authority
acting
outside
rules
equitable
maxim
petitioner
conduct
may
disentitle
relief
taken
account
rule
framers
drafted
rule
included
prejudice
requirement
see
lonchar
thomas
advisory
committee
note
habeas
corpus
rule
moreover
congress
considering
draft
rule
see
directly
focused
upon
prejudice
requirement
rejected
removing
draft
rule
provision
eased
burden
prejudice
requirement
presuming
prejudice
delay
five
years
compare
rules
procedure
communication
chief
justice
transmitting
rules
forms
governing
proceedings
sections
title
doc
pp
act
pub
stat
see
also
unsound
policy
require
defendant
overcome
presumption
prejudice
cf
mccarthy
madigan
even
area
exhaustion
judges
considerable
discretionary
authority
appropriate
deference
congress
power
prescribe
basic
procedural
scheme
claim
may
heard
federal
requires
fashioning
exhaustion
principles
manner
consistent
congressional
intent
applicable
statutory
scheme
recognize
considerable
debate
whether
present
rule
properly
balances
relevant
competing
interests
see
judicial
conference
ad
hoc
committee
federal
habeas
corpus
capital
cases
committee
report
proposal
hereinafter
powell
report
suggesting
statute
limitations
habeas
petitions
american
bar
association
toward
effective
system
review
state
death
penalty
cases
hereinafter
aba
report
debate
present
rule
effectiveness
affirm
deny
applicability
moreover
debate
focus
upon
congress
also
reveals
institutional
inappropriateness
amending
rule
lonchar
thomas
effect
ad
hoc
judicial
exception
rather
congressional
legislation
formal
rulemaking
process
see
vasquez
hillery
espite
many
attempts
recent
years
congress
yet
create
statute
limitations
federal
habeas
corpus
actions
lightly
create
new
judicial
rule
achieve
end
citation
omitted
appendix
opinion
listing
bills
proposed
statute
limitations
federal
habeas
cases
since
vasquez
none
adopted
fourth
contrary
appeals
view
believe
gomez
dist
northern
dist
authorized
ad
hoc
equitable
departures
habeas
corpus
rules
appeals
relied
heavily
statement
even
assume
however
harris
avoid
application
mccleskey
bar
claim
consider
merits
whether
claim
framed
habeas
petition
action
harris
seeks
equitable
remedy
lonchar
thomas
fifth
fact
lonchar
filed
petition
eleventh
hour
lead
different
conclusion
recognize
gomez
said
may
consider
nature
application
stay
execution
deciding
whether
grant
equitable
relief
made
similar
statements
cases
see
sawyer
whitley
judge
may
resolve
doubts
petitioners
delay
filings
last
minute
view
obtaining
stay
district
lack
time
give
necessary
consideration
scheduled
execution
herrera
collins
concurring
statements
help
state
however
involve
second
successive
habeas
petitions
rules
specifically
authorize
dismissal
petitions
abuse
writ
habeas
corpus
rule
see
also
authorizing
dismissal
applicant
deliberately
withheld
newly
asserted
ground
otherwise
abused
writ
emphasis
added
mccleskey
gives
content
notion
abuse
writ
cases
mentioned
statements
therefore
reflect
effort
follow
apply
habeas
corpus
rules
effort
develop
law
outside
rules
indeed
try
devise
sensible
way
supplementing
first
federal
habeas
petition
rules
ad
hoc
equitable
devices
prove
difficult
lonchar
thomas
discussed
supra
interest
permitting
federal
habeas
review
first
petition
quite
strong
given
importance
first
federal
habeas
petition
particularly
important
rule
deprive
inmates
access
writ
clear
fair
two
prominent
bodies
charged
developing
proposals
habeas
law
reform
pointed
developing
fair
effective
rules
minimize
harms
created
petitions
capital
cases
quite
complicated
requiring
consideration
issues
state
control
setting
execution
dates
time
needed
exhaust
state
remedies
common
practice
substituting
specialized
capital
counsel
habeas
time
needed
habeas
counsel
investigate
claims
ineffective
assistance
counsel
often
raised
direct
appeal
see
aba
report
system
review
employs
artificial
execution
dates
catalyst
many
eleventh
hours
many
last
minutes
petitioner
seek
stay
execution
virtually
every
level
execution
imminent
powell
report
risoners
often
obtain
qualified
counsel
execution
imminent
bodies
consequently
proposed
comprehensive
set
interrelated
changes
see
aba
report
powell
report
recent
legislative
proposals
see
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
complexity
offers
practical
caution
judicial
attempt
outside
framework
habeas
corpus
rules
fashion
similar
reforms
concerning
first
federal
habeas
petitions
sixth
special
circumstances
case
delay
lonchar
thomas
warrant
different
result
earlier
habeas
petitions
brought
lonchar
sister
brother
beside
point
lonchar
assert
claims
proceedings
conspire
siblings
delay
execution
contrary
opposed
petitions
prevailed
opposition
see
app
next
friend
petitions
neither
aggravate
mitigate
lonchar
delay
filing
petition
six
years
lonchar
filing
later
withdrawal
state
habeas
petition
seem
similarly
beside
point
assertion
withdrawal
petition
create
potential
ground
procedural
bar
second
state
petition
certain
circumstances
might
also
prevent
litigation
similar
claims
federal
see
coleman
state
despite
apparent
agreement
lonchar
withdrawal
state
petition
without
prejudice
see
app
asserted
bar
free
litigate
matter
remand
believe
lonchar
motive
filing
federal
habeas
petition
make
critical
difference
lonchar
say
filed
petition
delay
execution
hope
state
change
execution
method
lonchar
petition
also
requested
traditional
habeas
relief
new
trial
resentencing
app
told
district
specifically
considered
every
claim
wanted
hear
normally
courts
look
behind
action
valid
legal
claim
face
order
try
determine
comparative
weight
litigant
places
various
subjective
reasons
bringing
claim
valid
antitrust
complaint
environmental
action
example
suddenly
become
invalid
simply
litigant
subjectively
indifferent
receiving
requested
equitable
relief
instead
primarily
wants
please
lonchar
thomas
family
obtain
revenge
importantly
litigation
petitioner
subjective
motivations
risks
adding
complexity
habeas
litigation
asking
subjective
question
petitioner
true
motives
often
unanswerable
asking
may
encourage
reward
disingenuous
see
murray
carrier
rejecting
subjective
test
determining
cause
procedural
default
part
rule
federal
habeas
courts
routinely
required
hold
evidentiary
hearings
determine
prompted
counsel
failure
raise
claim
question
sum
believe
case
examined
within
framework
habeas
corpus
rules
settled
precedents
according
generalized
equitable
considerations
outside
framework
course
express
view
proper
outcome
application
rules
judgment
appeals
vacated
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
lonchar
thomas
last
years
bills
proposing
statute
limitations
federal
habeas
corpus
petitions
introduced
every
year
congress
bills
see
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
cong
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
lonchar
thomas
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
sess
lonchar
thomas
chief
justice
rehnquist
justice
scalia
justice
kennedy
justice
thomas
join
concurring
judgment
agree
judgment
appeals
reversed
sufficient
disagreement
reasoning
write
separately
disagree
statement
appeals
order
vacating
stay
lawful
dismissal
petition
lawful
ante
statement
believe
misreads
opinion
barefoot
estelle
ignores
reasoning
gomez
dist
northern
dist
order
review
dispose
petition
writ
habeas
corpus
vacates
stay
execution
dismisses
distinction
preliminary
matter
makes
difference
appeals
order
vacating
stay
lawful
dismissal
petition
lawful
ante
view
fact
reviewing
order
vacating
stay
anything
preliminary
correct
inasmuch
underlying
petition
likelihood
success
one
factor
considered
determining
whether
stay
entered
see
hilton
braunskill
lonchar
thomas
rule
rules
governing
cases
sets
forth
grounds
upon
habeas
petition
may
dismissed
merits
rule
petition
may
dismissed
found
successive
abusive
rule
may
also
dismissed
appears
state
respondent
officer
prejudiced
ability
respond
petition
delay
filing
unless
petitioner
shows
based
grounds
knowledge
exercise
reasonable
diligence
circumstances
prejudicial
state
occurred
rule
however
applicant
likelihood
success
consideration
determining
whether
entitled
stay
see
hilton
supra
habeas
rules
say
little
anything
determination
understandably
must
remembered
statutes
governing
habeas
corpus
enacted
writ
developed
vehicle
federal
courts
reexamine
lonchar
thomas
federal
constitutional
issues
even
trial
review
state
brown
allen
long
declined
declare
death
penalty
unconstitutional
gregg
georgia
proffitt
florida
jurek
texas
difficult
congress
anticipated
issues
arise
system
state
death
sentences
presumptively
valid
reexamined
federal
execution
consider
constitutional
challenges
manner
imposed
typical
noncapital
habeas
case
relatively
easy
rule
application
stay
execution
state
sentence
consulting
ordinary
principles
governing
stays
rarely
ever
noncapital
petitioner
seek
stay
sentence
district
passed
merits
petition
petitioner
make
request
usually
little
chance
success
merits
since
confined
pursuant
presumptively
valid
final
judgment
conviction
rendered
state
see
entertaining
petition
district
awards
writ
stay
equities
shift
favor
petitioner
enlarged
unless
state
demonstrate
equities
counsel
otherwise
hilton
supra
easily
managed
system
adapted
govern
capital
habeas
cases
long
capital
petitioner
files
habeas
petition
sufficiently
advance
execution
date
files
timely
fashion
district
may
consider
petition
due
course
without
way
disturbing
sentence
execution
date
ruling
petition
merits
case
petitioner
instead
files
eleventh
hour
federal
habeas
petition
customary
principles
must
revised
accordingly
district
lonchar
thomas
may
feel
simply
time
date
execution
adequately
consider
merits
petitioner
claims
naturally
disposed
district
enter
stay
enable
district
sets
aside
scheduled
state
execution
sentence
imposed
presumptively
valid
final
state
judgment
conviction
basis
tentative
assessment
judgment
violates
federal
constitutional
right
unless
nature
petition
taken
account
late
filing
may
induce
federal
disregard
comity
frustrate
sovereign
power
punish
offenders
engle
isaac
interference
might
avoided
timely
filing
customary
principles
must
also
revised
account
attempt
petitioner
manipulate
district
granting
relief
relief
clearly
precluded
gomez
dist
northern
dist
demonstrated
manipulative
uses
stay
power
constitute
equitable
grounds
justify
denial
application
stay
state
order
execution
vacated
stay
execution
issued
behalf
robert
alton
harris
lonchar
thomas
california
prisoner
pending
consideration
action
alleging
method
execution
violated
eighth
amendment
see
harris
raised
eighth
amendment
claim
four
federal
habeas
corpus
petitions
filed
years
considered
claim
obvious
attempt
avoid
application
mccleskey
zant
bar
successive
claim
relief
ibid
vacated
stay
basis
bar
alone
explicitly
even
assume
however
harris
avoid
application
mccleskey
bar
claim
consider
merits
whether
claim
framed
habeas
petition
action
harris
seeks
equitable
remedy
equity
must
take
consideration
state
strong
interest
proceeding
judgment
harris
obvious
attempt
manipulation
claim
brought
decade
ago
good
reason
abusive
delay
compounded
attempts
manipulate
judicial
process
may
consider
nature
application
stay
execution
deciding
whether
grant
equitable
relief
citations
omitted
lonchar
thomas
gomez
also
confirms
habeas
petitioner
misconduct
applying
stay
may
disentitle
stay
even
petition
first
inequitable
conduct
gomez
criticized
abusive
delay
manipulation
may
present
stay
application
gomez
equivocate
said
equity
must
take
consideration
obvious
attempt
manipulation
may
consider
nature
application
stay
execution
deciding
whether
grant
equitable
relief
citations
omitted
may
admitted
stronger
presumption
favor
deciding
merits
petition
successive
petition
successive
nature
petition
gives
rise
additional
concern
counseling
review
merits
petitioner
frustrating
state
attempts
execute
judgment
exploiting
fact
ordinary
principles
res
judicata
apply
habeas
corpus
mccleskey
zant
follow
however
petitioner
abuse
writ
rule
may
never
found
engaged
misconduct
criticized
gomez
means
misconduct
petitioner
less
likely
result
refusal
grant
stay
order
consider
merits
petition
majority
attempts
distinguish
gomez
matter
lonchar
thomas
case
first
habeas
petition
ante
reading
wholly
implausible
first
paragraph
order
already
discussed
fact
harris
petitioner
paragraph
harris
misconduct
relation
application
quoted
legal
significance
petition
successive
superfluous
support
view
stay
must
granted
first
federal
habeas
petition
dismissed
relies
decision
barefoot
estelle
barefoot
present
case
arose
different
contexts
question
presented
decided
barefoot
addressed
merits
habeas
petition
may
determine
whether
petitioner
obtains
stay
announcing
considering
appropriate
standard
granting
denying
stay
execution
pending
disposition
appeal
federal
appeals
federal
habeas
corpus
petitioner
affirming
denial
stay
appeals
ruled
merits
barefoot
appeal
issue
present
case
quite
different
whether
petitioner
course
conduct
seeking
writ
may
considered
district
deciding
whether
grant
stay
extent
reading
barefoot
depends
belief
decision
first
federal
habeas
petition
somehow
necessary
validate
state
conviction
ignores
barefoot
assertion
contrary
role
federal
habeas
proceedings
secondary
limited
federal
courts
forums
relitigate
state
trials
procedures
adopted
facilitate
orderly
consideration
disposition
habeas
petitions
legal
entitlements
defendant
right
pursue
irrespective
contribution
procedures
make
toward
uncovering
constitutional
error
lonchar
thomas
nonetheless
agree
appeals
erred
vacating
stay
granted
case
district
district
consider
whether
petitioner
conduct
constituted
misconduct
abusive
disentitled
stay
focused
solely
likelihood
petitioner
habeas
petition
might
dismissed
although
determined
petitioner
abused
writ
rely
finding
deny
stay
correctly
concluding
first
habeas
petition
may
dismissed
basis
abuse
writ
app
determination
petitioner
habeas
petition
dismissed
rule
ground
dismiss
first
petition
merits
appeals
erred
concluding
otherwise
although
findings
supporting
district
determination
petitioner
abused
writ
go
long
way
toward
supporting
affirmance
ground
petitioner
misconduct
disentitled
stay
reversal
still
order
agree
petitioner
conduct
proceedings
neither
aggravate
mitigate
lonchar
delay
filing
ante
petitioner
may
blamed
asserted
competence
control
habeas
claims
case
law
required
district
establish
much
see
whitmore
arkansas
blamed
brother
sister
desire
protect
although
lonchar
thomas
different
case
record
established
relatives
colluding
stay
execution
avoid
putting
claims
keep
options
open
future
district
erred
concluding
petitioner
culpable
course
proceedings
paradigmatic
abuse
discretion
base
judgment
erroneous
view
law
schlup
delo
slip
concurring
citing
cooter
gell
hartmarx
district
necessarily
abused
discretion
determining
abuse
writ
reconsideration
determination
equities
petitioner
stay
application
order
therefore
concur
judgment
reversal
footnotes
course
may
cases
nature
petition
attributable
state
scheduling
execution
date
petitioner
may
appeal
denial
postconviction
relief
timely
manner
petitioner
deliberate
refusal
seek
relief
certain
district
courts
capable
distinguishing
two
situations
action
suit
harris
one
member
note
claim
declined
consider
merits
enough
merit
class
plaintiffs
prevailed
district
appeals
fierro
gomez
lonchar
thomas