duncan
superintendent
great
meadow
correctional
facility
walker
argued
march
decided
june
time
application
state
collateral
review
pending
tolls
limitation
period
filing
federal
habeas
petitions
april
effective
date
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
respondent
state
robbery
conviction
became
final
filed
inter
alia
federal
habeas
petition
district
dismissed
petition
without
prejudice
apparent
respondent
exhausted
available
state
remedies
may
without
returned
state
respondent
filed
another
federal
habeas
petition
district
dismissed
petition
respondent
filed
within
reasonable
time
aedpa
effective
date
reversing
second
circuit
found
respondent
first
federal
habeas
petition
application
collateral
review
tolled
limitation
period
made
current
petition
timely
held
federal
habeas
petition
application
state
collateral
review
within
meaning
result
toll
limitation
period
pendency
respondent
first
federal
habeas
petition
begins
language
statute
see
williams
taylor
petitioner
contention
state
applies
entire
phrase
collateral
review
correct
begin
congress
placed
state
phrase
without
specifically
naming
kind
federal
review
fact
aedpa
provisions
denominate
expressly
state
federal
proceedings
see
supplies
strong
evidence
congress
mentioned
federal
review
expressly
congress
intended
include
federal
review
see
bates
respondent
contrary
construction
render
word
state
insignificant
wholly
superfluous
duty
give
effect
possible
every
word
statute
menasche
makes
reluctant
treat
statutory
terms
surplusage
especially
term
occupies
pivotal
place
statutory
scheme
word
state
federal
habeas
statute
respondent
rendition
state
operative
effect
scope
clause
precisely
content
read
collateral
review
contrary
second
circuit
characterization
petitioner
interpretation
yield
linguistic
oddity
state
collateral
review
naturally
yields
understanding
state
collateral
review
reasoning
phrase
collateral
review
rendered
meaningless
refer
federal
habeas
petitions
depends
incorrect
premise
state
collateral
review
review
ther
collateral
review
include
state
civil
commitment
civil
contempt
order
congress
also
may
used
collateral
recognition
diverse
terminology
different
employ
represent
different
forms
collateral
review
available
conviction
examination
aedpa
provision
establishing
limitation
period
filing
petitions
state
capital
cases
shows
congress
used
disjunctive
clause
review
collateral
relief
latter
term
possibly
include
anything
federal
within
ambit
petitioner
construction
also
far
consistent
respondent
aedpa
purpose
principles
comity
finality
federalism
respondent
contends
petitioner
interpretation
creates
potential
unfairness
litigants
file
timely
federal
petitions
dismissed
without
prejudice
limitation
period
expired
sole
task
one
statutory
construction
light
facts
respondent
never
cured
defects
led
dismissal
first
federal
petition
remaining
nine
months
limitation
period
petitions
contained
different
claims
occasion
address
alternative
scenarios
pp
reversed
remanded
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
scalia
kennedy
souter
thomas
joined
souter
filed
concurring
opinion
stevens
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
souter
joined
breyer
filed
dissenting
opinion
ginsburg
joined
george
duncan
superintendent
great
meadow
correctional
facility
petitioner
sherman
walker
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
delivered
opinion
title
supp
provides
time
properly
filed
application
state
collateral
review
respect
pertinent
judgment
claim
pending
shall
counted
toward
period
limitation
subsection
case
presents
question
whether
federal
habeas
corpus
petition
application
state
collateral
review
within
meaning
provision
several
judgments
conviction
robbery
entered
respondent
sherman
walker
new
york
state
courts
last
convictions
came
june
respondent
pleaded
guilty
robbery
first
degree
new
york
queens
county
respondent
sentenced
years
prison
conviction
respondent
unsuccessfully
pursued
number
state
remedies
connection
convictions
unnecessary
describe
proceedings
herein
respondent
last
conviction
affirmed
june
respondent
later
denied
leave
appeal
new
york
appeals
respondent
also
sought
writ
error
coram
nobis
appellate
division
denied
march
respondent
last
conviction
became
final
april
prior
april
effective
date
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
stat
single
document
dated
april
respondent
filed
complaint
rev
stat
petition
habeas
corpus
district
eastern
district
new
york
july
district
dismissed
complaint
petition
without
prejudice
respect
habeas
petition
district
citing
concluded
respondent
adequately
set
forth
claim
apparent
respondent
exhausted
available
state
remedies
district
noted
example
respondent
failed
specify
claims
litigated
state
appellate
proceedings
relating
robbery
convictions
may
one
year
aedpa
effective
date
respondent
filed
another
federal
habeas
petition
district
undisputed
respondent
returned
state
since
dismissal
first
federal
habeas
filing
may
district
dismissed
petition
time
barred
respondent
filed
petition
within
reasonable
time
aedpa
effective
date
appeals
second
circuit
reversed
district
judgment
reinstated
habeas
petition
remanded
case
proceedings
walker
artuz
appeals
noted
outset
respondent
conviction
become
final
prior
aedpa
effective
date
april
file
federal
habeas
petition
also
observed
exclusion
limitation
period
time
respondent
first
federal
habeas
petition
pending
district
render
instant
habeas
petition
timely
appeals
held
respondent
first
federal
habeas
petition
tolled
limitation
period
application
collateral
review
within
meaning
characterized
disjunctive
collateral
creating
distinct
break
two
kinds
review
also
stated
application
word
state
collateral
create
linguistic
oddity
form
construction
state
collateral
review
reasoned
phrase
collateral
review
meaningless
refer
federal
habeas
petitions
therefore
concluded
word
state
modified
appeals
also
found
conflict
interpretation
statute
purpose
aedpa
found
instead
construction
promote
goal
encouraging
petitioners
file
federal
habeas
applications
soon
possible
granted
certiorari
resolve
conflict
second
circuit
decision
decisions
three
courts
appeals
see
jiminez
rice
grooms
johnson
per
curiam
jones
morton
one
appeals
since
adopted
second
circuit
view
petrick
martin
reverse
ii
task
construe
congress
enacted
begin
always
language
statute
see
williams
taylor
public
employees
retirement
system
ohio
betts
watt
energy
action
ed
foundation
respondent
reads
apply
word
state
term
phrase
collateral
view
properly
filed
federal
habeas
petition
tolls
limitation
period
petitioner
contends
word
state
applies
entire
phrase
collateral
review
view
properly
filed
federal
habeas
petition
toll
limitation
period
believe
petitioner
interpretation
correct
several
reasons
begin
congress
placed
word
state
collateral
review
without
specifically
naming
kind
federal
review
essence
respondent
position
congress
used
phrase
collateral
review
incorporate
federal
habeas
petitions
class
applications
review
toll
limitation
period
comparison
text
language
aedpa
provisions
supplies
strong
evidence
congress
intended
include
federal
habeas
petitions
within
scope
congress
mentioned
federal
review
expressly
several
portions
aedpa
congress
specifically
used
words
state
federal
denote
state
federal
proceedings
example
supp
provides
ineffectiveness
incompetence
counsel
federal
state
collateral
proceedings
shall
ground
relief
proceeding
arising
section
likewise
first
sentence
supp
provides
ineffectiveness
incompetence
counsel
state
federal
proceedings
capital
case
shall
ground
relief
proceeding
arising
section
second
sentence
limitation
shall
preclude
appointment
different
counsel
motion
request
prisoner
phase
state
federal
proceedings
basis
ineffectiveness
incompetence
counsel
proceedings
finally
supp
excuses
state
capital
prisoner
failure
raise
claim
properly
state
failure
based
factual
predicate
discovered
exercise
due
diligence
time
present
claim
state
federal
review
section
contrast
employs
word
state
word
federal
modifier
review
well
settled
congress
includes
particular
language
one
section
statute
omits
another
section
act
generally
presumed
congress
acts
intentionally
purposely
disparate
inclusion
exclusion
bates
quoting
russello
find
likely
explanation
congress
omission
word
federal
congress
intend
properly
filed
applications
federal
review
toll
limitation
period
anomalous
say
least
congress
usher
federal
review
generic
rubric
collateral
review
statutory
provision
refers
expressly
state
review
denominating
expressly
state
federal
proceedings
parts
statute
anomaly
underscored
fact
words
state
federal
likely
small
import
congress
drafts
statute
governs
federal
collateral
review
state
judgments
adopt
respondent
construction
statute
render
word
state
insignificant
wholly
superfluous
duty
give
effect
possible
every
clause
word
statute
menasche
quoting
montclair
ramsdell
see
also
williams
taylor
describing
rule
cardinal
principle
statutory
construction
market
hoffman
early
bacon
abridgment
sect
said
statute
upon
whole
construed
prevented
clause
sentence
word
shall
superfluous
void
thus
reluctan
treat
statutory
terms
surplusage
setting
babbitt
sweet
home
chapter
communities
great
see
also
ratzlaf
especially
unwilling
term
occupies
pivotal
place
statutory
scheme
word
state
federal
habeas
statute
respondent
rendition
congress
inclusion
word
state
operative
effect
scope
provision
phrase
state
collateral
review
construed
encompass
state
federal
collateral
review
word
state
places
constraint
class
applications
review
toll
limitation
period
clause
instead
precisely
content
read
collateral
review
made
word
state
say
congress
singled
applications
state
review
one
example
universe
applications
collateral
review
approach
however
word
state
still
nothing
delimit
entire
class
applications
review
toll
limitation
period
construction
word
state
nothing
modify
relegates
state
quite
insignificant
role
statutory
provision
believe
duty
give
word
operative
effect
possible
walters
metropolitan
ed
enterprises
requires
context
appeals
characterized
petitioner
interpretation
producing
linguistic
oddity
state
collateral
review
ungainly
construction
appeals
believe
congress
intended
nothing
precludes
application
word
state
entire
phrase
collateral
review
regardless
resulting
construction
one
posits
term
collateral
easily
understood
unit
state
applies
state
applies
moreover
petitioner
interpretation
compel
verbal
formula
hypothesized
appeals
indeed
ungainliness
state
collateral
review
good
reason
congress
might
avoided
precise
verbal
formulation
first
place
application
word
state
phrase
collateral
review
naturally
yields
understanding
state
collateral
review
appeals
also
reasoned
petitioner
reading
statute
fails
give
operative
effect
phrase
collateral
review
claimed
phrase
collateral
review
meaningless
refer
federal
habeas
petitions
ibid
argument
however
fails
depends
incorrect
premise
form
state
collateral
review
state
review
within
meaning
contrary
possible
collateral
review
include
review
state
judgment
criminal
conviction
section
limitation
period
applies
application
writ
habeas
corpus
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
section
provides
tolling
pendency
properly
filed
application
state
collateral
review
respect
pertinent
judgment
claim
nothing
language
provisions
requires
state
judgment
pursuant
person
custody
criminal
conviction
ed
supp
terms
apply
custody
pursuant
state
criminal
conviction
see
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
person
custody
pursuant
judgment
state
incarceration
pursuant
state
criminal
conviction
may
far
common
familiar
basis
satisfaction
custody
requirement
cases
types
state
judgments
pursuant
person
may
held
custody
within
meaning
federal
habeas
statute
example
federal
habeas
corpus
review
may
available
challenge
legality
state
order
civil
commitment
state
order
civil
contempt
see
francois
henderson
entertaining
challenge
brought
federal
habeas
petition
state
commitment
person
mental
institution
upon
verdict
guilty
reason
insanity
leonard
hammond
holding
constitutional
challenges
civil
contempt
orders
failure
pay
child
support
cognizable
habeas
corpus
action
types
state
judgments
neither
constitute
require
criminal
convictions
state
collateral
review
available
respect
judgments
strictly
speaking
review
accordingly
even
state
review
means
collateral
review
conviction
provided
state
quoting
barrett
yearwood
supp
ed
cal
phrase
collateral
review
need
include
federal
habeas
petitions
order
independent
meaning
congress
also
may
employed
construction
collateral
recognition
diverse
terminology
different
employ
represent
different
forms
collateral
review
available
conviction
jurisdictions
term
may
denote
particular
procedure
review
conviction
distinct
forms
conventionally
considered
postconviction
review
example
florida
employs
procedure
officially
entitled
motion
vacate
set
aside
correct
sentence
rule
crim
proc
florida
courts
commonly
referred
rule
motion
motion
relief
distinguished
procedure
vehicles
collateral
review
criminal
conviction
state
petition
habeas
corpus
see
bryant
state
app
petition
habeas
corpus
used
circumvent
period
filing
motions
relief
finley
state
app
remedy
habeas
corpus
available
substitute
relief
rule
congress
may
refrained
exclusive
reliance
term
leave
doubt
tolling
provision
applies
types
state
collateral
review
available
conviction
denominated
parlance
particular
jurisdiction
examination
another
aedpa
provision
also
demonstrates
collateral
need
refer
form
federal
review
order
meaning
title
supp
establishes
limitation
period
filing
petitions
state
capital
cases
arise
jurisdictions
meeting
requirements
section
provides
limitation
period
shall
tolled
date
first
petition
review
collateral
relief
filed
final
state
disposition
petition
reference
final
state
disposition
petition
makes
clear
petitions
filed
state
petitions
federal
review
toll
limitation
period
capital
cases
congress
therefore
used
phrases
review
collateral
relief
disjunctive
clause
term
collateral
whatever
precise
content
possibly
include
anything
federal
within
ambit
illustration
vitiates
suggestion
collateral
relief
review
must
include
federal
relief
review
order
term
significance
apart
review
consideration
competing
constructions
light
aedpa
purposes
reinforces
conclusion
draw
text
petitioner
interpretation
statute
consistent
aedpa
purpose
principles
comity
finality
federalism
williams
specifically
petitioner
construction
promotes
exhaustion
state
remedies
respecting
interest
finality
state
judgments
respondent
interpretation
however
provision
far
less
encourage
exhaustion
prior
seeking
federal
habeas
review
hold
greater
potential
hinder
finality
exhaustion
requirement
ensures
state
courts
opportunity
fully
consider
challenges
state
custodial
judgment
lower
federal
courts
may
entertain
collateral
attack
upon
judgment
see
boerckel
exhaustion
doctrine
designed
give
state
courts
full
fair
opportunity
resolve
federal
constitutional
claims
claims
presented
federal
courts
rose
lundy
rigorously
enforced
total
exhaustion
rule
encourage
state
prisoners
seek
full
relief
first
state
courts
thus
giving
courts
first
opportunity
review
claims
constitutional
error
requirement
principally
designed
protect
state
courts
role
enforcement
federal
law
prevent
disruption
state
judicial
proceedings
exhaustion
rule
promotes
comity
unseemly
dual
system
government
federal
district
upset
state
conviction
without
opportunity
state
courts
correct
constitutional
violation
ibid
quoting
darr
burford
see
also
supra
comity
thus
dictates
prisoner
alleges
continued
confinement
state
conviction
violates
federal
law
state
courts
first
opportunity
review
claim
provide
necessary
relief
limitation
period
quite
plainly
serves
interest
finality
state
judgments
see
generally
calderon
thompson
provision
reduces
potential
delay
road
finality
restricting
time
prospective
federal
habeas
petitioner
seek
federal
habeas
review
tolling
provision
balances
interests
served
exhaustion
requirement
limitation
period
section
promotes
exhaustion
state
remedies
protecting
state
prisoner
ability
later
apply
federal
habeas
relief
state
remedies
pursued
time
provision
limits
harm
interest
finality
according
tolling
effect
properly
filed
application
state
collateral
review
tolling
limitation
period
pursuit
state
remedies
pendency
applications
federal
review
provides
powerful
incentive
litigants
exhaust
available
state
remedies
proceeding
lower
federal
courts
statute
construed
give
applications
federal
review
tolling
effect
applications
state
collateral
review
furnish
little
incentive
individuals
seek
relief
state
courts
filing
federal
habeas
petitions
tolling
provision
instead
indifferent
state
federal
filings
statutory
provisions
course
still
provide
individuals
good
reason
exhaust
step
design
time
respondent
interpretation
undermine
interest
finality
creating
potential
delay
adjudication
claims
diminution
statutory
incentives
proceed
first
state
also
increase
risk
piecemeal
litigation
exhaustion
requirement
designed
reduce
cf
rose
observed
strict
enforcement
exhaustion
requirement
encourage
habeas
petitioners
exhaust
claims
state
present
federal
single
habeas
petition
ibid
adopt
respondent
construction
dilute
efficacy
exhaustion
requirement
achieving
objective
tolling
limitation
period
federal
habeas
petition
dismissed
without
prejudice
thus
create
opportunities
delay
piecemeal
litigation
without
advancing
goals
comity
federalism
exhaustion
requirement
serves
believe
congress
designed
statute
manner
appeals
reasoned
interpretation
statute
congress
goal
spur
defendants
file
federal
habeas
petitions
quickly
view
fails
account
sufficiently
aepda
clear
purpose
encourage
litigants
pursue
claims
state
prior
seeking
federal
collateral
review
see
section
limitation
period
tolling
provision
together
exhaustion
requirement
encourage
litigants
first
exhaust
state
remedies
file
federal
habeas
petitions
soon
possible
respondent
contends
petitioner
construction
statute
creates
potential
unfairness
litigants
file
timely
federal
habeas
petitions
dismissed
without
prejudice
limitation
period
expired
sole
task
case
one
statutory
construction
upon
examining
language
purpose
statute
convinced
toll
limitation
period
pendency
federal
habeas
petition
also
note
district
dismissed
respondent
first
federal
habeas
petition
without
prejudice
respondent
nine
months
remaining
limitation
period
cure
defects
led
dismissal
undisputed
however
petitioner
neither
returned
state
filed
nondefective
federal
habeas
petition
time
elapsed
respondent
may
federal
habeas
petition
also
contained
claims
different
presented
april
petition
light
facts
occasion
address
alternative
scenarios
respondent
describes
also
occasion
address
question
justice
stevens
raises
concerning
availability
equitable
tolling
hold
application
federal
habeas
corpus
review
application
state
collateral
review
within
meaning
section
therefore
toll
limitation
period
pendency
respondent
first
federal
habeas
petition
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
george
duncan
superintendent
great
meadow
correctional
facility
petitioner
sherman
walker
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
souter
concurring
although
join
opinion
full
joined
justice
stevens
separate
opinion
pointing
nothing
bars
district
retaining
jurisdiction
pending
complete
exhaustion
state
remedies
claim
equitable
tolling
present
serious
issue
facts
different
us
george
duncan
superintendent
great
meadow
correctional
facility
petitioner
sherman
walker
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
stevens
justice
souter
joins
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
substantially
reasons
stated
pages
opinion
agree
better
reading
supp
encompasses
state
applications
collateral
review
thus
holds
application
federal
habeas
corpus
review
application
state
collateral
review
within
meaning
ante
write
separately
add
two
observations
regarding
equitable
powers
federal
courts
unaffected
today
decision
construing
single
provision
antiterrorism
effective
death
penalty
act
aedpa
stat
first
although
decision
rose
lundy
prescribed
dismissal
federal
habeas
corpus
petitions
containing
unexhausted
claims
world
reason
district
retain
jurisdiction
meritorious
claim
stay
proceedings
pending
complete
exhaustion
state
remedies
indeed
every
reason
aedpa
gives
district
alternative
simply
denying
petition
containing
unexhausted
nonmeritorious
claims
see
supp
failure
retain
jurisdiction
foreclose
federal
review
meritorious
claim
lapse
aedpa
limitations
period
second
despite
suggestion
tolling
limitations
period
first
federal
habeas
petition
undermine
purposes
aedpa
see
ante
neither
narrow
holding
anything
text
legislative
history
aedpa
precludes
federal
deeming
limitations
period
tolled
petition
matter
equity
opinion
address
federal
ability
toll
limitations
period
apart
see
ante
furthermore
federal
might
well
conclude
tolling
appropriate
based
reasonable
belief
congress
intended
bar
federal
habeas
review
petitioners
invoke
jurisdiction
within
interval
prescribed
aedpa
federal
habeas
corpus
evolved
product
judicial
doctrine
statutory
law
see
generally
chemerinsky
federal
jurisdiction
ed
context
aedpa
limitations
period
terms
runs
date
judgment
became
final
see
courts
appeals
uniformly
created
grace
period
running
date
aedpa
enactment
prisoners
whose
state
convictions
became
final
prior
similarly
federal
courts
may
well
conclude
congress
simply
overlooked
class
petitioners
whose
timely
filed
habeas
petitions
remain
pending
district
past
limitations
period
dismissed
belatedly
realizes
one
claims
see
post
breyer
dissenting
district
courts
average
take
days
dismiss
petitions
procedural
grounds
remain
pending
years
result
equitable
considerations
may
make
appropriate
federal
courts
fill
perceived
omission
part
congress
tolling
aedpa
statute
limitations
unexhausted
federal
habeas
petitions
today
ruling
preclude
possibility
given
limited
issue
presented
case
correspondingly
limited
concur
holding
understanding
foreclose
either
safeguards
potential
injustice
literal
reading
might
otherwise
produce
george
duncan
superintendent
great
meadow
correctional
facility
petitioner
sherman
walker
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
breyer
justice
ginsburg
joins
dissenting
federal
habeas
corpus
statute
limits
period
time
state
prisoner
may
file
federal
habeas
petition
one
year
ordinarily
running
time
prisoner
conviction
becomes
final
state
courts
see
supp
section
tolls
period
properly
filed
application
state
collateral
review
pending
question
us
whether
tolling
provision
applies
federal
well
state
collateral
review
proceedings
words
collateral
review
encompass
federal
habeas
corpus
proceedings
believe
understand
conclusion
one
must
understand
legal
issue
us
significant
state
prisoner
ever
want
federal
habeas
corpus
proceedings
toll
federal
habeas
corpus
limitations
period
point
tolling
provide
state
prisoner
adequate
time
file
federal
habeas
petition
petitioner
already
filed
petition
need
tolling
answer
question
problem
gives
rise
issue
us
federal
may
required
dismiss
state
prisoner
federal
habeas
petition
merits
prisoner
exhausted
state
collateral
remedies
every
claim
presented
federal
petition
see
supp
requiring
petitioners
exhaust
state
remedies
filing
federal
habeas
petition
cf
rose
lundy
holding
predecessor
current
district
courts
reach
merits
mixed
petitions
containing
exhausted
unexhausted
claims
dismissal
means
prisoner
wishing
pursue
claim
must
return
state
pursue
state
remedies
loses
file
federal
habeas
petition
federal
takes
time
statute
tolls
limitations
period
time
prisoner
proceeds
state
courts
unless
statute
also
tolls
limitations
period
time
defective
petition
pending
federal
state
prisoner
may
find
seeks
return
federal
run
time
possibility
purely
theoretical
justice
department
study
indicates
habeas
petitions
dismissed
dismissed
failure
exhaust
state
remedies
see
dept
justice
office
justice
programs
bureau
justice
statistics
federal
habeas
corpus
review
challenging
state
criminal
convictions
hereinafter
federal
habeas
corpus
review
take
courts
significant
amount
time
dispose
even
petitions
addressed
merits
average
district
courts
took
days
dismiss
petitions
procedural
grounds
see
also
habeas
petitions
nearly
half
pending
district
six
months
longer
pending
two
years
thus
words
collateral
review
include
federal
collateral
review
large
group
federal
habeas
petitioners
seeking
return
federal
subsequent
rejection
unexhausted
claim
may
find
claims
time
barred
moreover
district
courts
vary
substantially
time
take
rule
habeas
petitions
two
identically
situated
prisoners
receive
opposite
results
prisoner
prisoner
file
mixed
petitions
different
district
courts
six
months
federal
limitations
period
expires
takes
three
months
dismiss
prisoner
petition
seven
months
dismiss
prisoner
petition
prisoner
able
return
federal
exhausting
state
remedies
prisoner
due
fault
may
hand
words
collateral
review
include
federal
collateral
review
state
prisoners
whose
federal
claims
dismissed
nonexhaustion
simply
add
limitations
period
time
previously
spent
state
federal
proceedings
things
equal
able
return
federal
pursuing
state
remedies
remain
available
similarly
situated
prisoners
suffer
different
outcomes
simply
file
petitions
different
district
courts
statute
language
read
tell
us
whether
words
state
collateral
review
include
federal
habeas
proceedings
rather
simply
unclear
whether
congress
intended
word
state
modify
review
alone
also
modify
collateral
review
majority
believes
indeed
naturally
read
statute
refers
two
distinct
kinds
applications
applications
state
review
applications
collateral
review
broad
category
face
include
applications
federal
habeas
review
majority
reading
requires
either
unusual
intonation
state
review
slight
rewrite
language
inserting
word
state
appear
collateral
regardless
believe
either
reading
possible
statute
words
singular
plain
meaning
neither
believe
various
interpretive
canons
majority
appeals
solve
problem
invoking
principle
congress
acts
intentionally
purposely
disparate
inclusion
particular
words
bates
quoting
russello
majority
attempts
ascertain
congress
intent
looking
tolling
provision
statutory
neighbors
points
provisions
congress
explicitly
used
words
state
federal
together
expressing
intent
cover
kinds
proceedings
see
ante
citing
supp
reasons
congress
failure
displays
different
intent
statutory
neighbors
show
congress
wished
unambiguously
limit
tolling
state
proceedings
knew
custis
special
tolling
provision
governing
certain
capital
cases
congress
said
explicitly
limitations
period
tolled
date
first
petition
review
collateral
relief
filed
final
state
disposition
petition
thus
making
clear
federal
proceedings
example
petitions
certiorari
count
supp
emphasis
added
congress
failure
include
similar
qualification
tolling
provision
show
means
provision
cover
federal
state
proceedings
fact
argument
neighbors
shows
congress
might
spoken
clearly
prove
statutory
point
majority
also
believes
interpretation
gives
effect
every
word
statute
particular
word
state
asks
congress
meant
cover
federal
habeas
review
word
state
appear
statute
federal
habeas
proceedings
form
proceedings
congress
meant
cover
said
collateral
review
see
ante
argument
proves
much
one
ask
equal
force
congress
intended
exclude
federal
habeas
proceedings
word
appear
statute
state
proceedings
form
collateral
review
congress
meant
exclude
federal
collateral
proceedings
said
state
collateral
review
thereby
clearly
indicating
phrase
applies
state
proceedings
fact
kind
argument
viewed
realistically
gets
us
nowhere
congress
probably
picked
state
proceedings
universe
collateral
proceedings
mentioned
separately
state
proceedings
salient
example
collateral
proceedings
understand
understand
whether
universe
congress
picked
state
proceedings
example
universe
collateral
proceedings
universe
state
collateral
proceedings
statute
simply
say
indeed
majority
recognizes
neither
statute
language
application
canons
construction
sufficient
resolve
problem
concedes
phrase
collateral
review
construed
state
collateral
review
add
little
coverage
words
state
review
provide
absence
see
ante
noting
state
criminal
conviction
far
common
basis
seeking
federal
habeas
review
majority
resolves
difficulty
noting
collateral
review
also
include
either
review
state
civil
confinement
proceedings
state
review
state
refers
name
state
habeas
proceedings
see
ante
difficult
believe
congress
state
civil
proceedings
mind
given
provisions
within
indicate
congress
saw
criminal
proceedings
basic
subject
matter
instance
exceptions
bar
successive
petitions
seem
presume
petition
issue
challenges
criminal
conviction
see
supp
requiring
new
rule
constitutional
law
made
retroactive
cases
collateral
review
requiring
new
evidence
establishing
constitutional
error
reasonable
factfinder
found
applicant
guilty
underlying
offense
seem
likely
congress
expected
federal
courts
applying
tolling
provision
construe
review
exclude
state
habeas
petitions
challenging
convictions
statute
words
state
proceedings
appear
federal
statute
federal
courts
likely
apply
words
whatever
state
proceedings
fact
fall
within
federal
description
whatever
different
labels
different
might
choose
attach
simpler
meaningful
logical
assume
congress
meant
words
collateral
review
cast
wider
net
net
wide
enough
include
federal
collateral
proceedings
precede
dismissal
nonexhaustion
faced
statutory
ambiguity
look
statutory
purposes
order
reach
proper
interpretation
agree
congress
sought
principles
comity
finality
federalism
ante
quoting
williams
taylor
also
ask
whether
congress
intended
create
kind
unexhausted
petition
problem
described
outset
answer
congress
enacted
statute
agree
gave
state
prisoners
full
year
plus
duration
state
collateral
proceedings
file
federal
habeas
corpus
petition
congress
intended
shorten
time
dramatically
random
perhaps
erase
altogether
den
ying
petitioner
protections
great
writ
entirely
lonchar
thomas
simply
technical
nature
habeas
rules
led
prisoner
initially
file
petition
wrong
majority
argument
assumes
congressional
desire
strengthen
prisoners
incentive
file
state
first
likely
result
today
holding
virtually
every
state
prisoner
already
knows
must
first
exhaust
remedies
imagine
virtually
try
problem
arises
vast
majority
federal
habeas
petitions
brought
without
legal
representation
see
federal
habeas
corpus
review
finding
habeas
petitioners
study
pro
se
prisoners
acting
pro
se
often
know
whether
change
wording
state
federal
petitions
seen
federal
new
claim
better
way
stating
old
one
often
understand
whether
new
facts
brought
forward
federal
petition
reflect
new
claim
better
support
old
one
insofar
approach
likely
lead
fewer
improper
federal
petitions
increased
confusion
prisoners
hesitate
change
language
state
petitions
add
facts
greater
unfairness
undercut
one
significant
purpose
provision
us
grant
state
prisoners
fair
reasonable
time
bring
first
federal
habeas
corpus
petition
likely
prisoners
deliberately
seek
delay
repeatedly
filing
unexhausted
petitions
federal
suggests
see
ante
first
prisoners
sentence
death
vast
majority
habeas
petitioners
incentive
delay
adjudication
claims
rather
prisoner
principal
interest
obtaining
speedy
federal
relief
rose
lundy
thus
interest
reducing
piecemeal
litigation
ante
likely
significantly
furthered
majority
holding
finally
majority
construction
statute
necessarily
promote
comity
federal
courts
understanding
dismissal
nonexhaustion
may
mean
loss
opportunity
federal
habeas
review
may
tend
read
ambiguous
earlier
proceedings
adequately
exhausted
federal
petition
current
claims
similar
reasons
wherever
possible
may
reach
merits
federal
petition
claims
without
sending
petitioner
back
state
exhaustion
extent
majority
interpretation
result
lesser
greater
respect
state
interests
majority
refers
addition
creating
pressure
expedite
consideration
habeas
petitions
reach
merits
arguably
exhausted
claims
impose
heavier
burden
district
courts
justice
stevens
sound
suggestions
district
courts
hold
mixed
petitions
abeyance
employ
equitable
tolling
see
ante
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
properly
ameliorate
unfairness
majority
interpretation
also
add
burdens
district
courts
way
simple
tolling
federal
habeas
petitions
two
recent
cases
assumed
congress
want
deprive
state
prisoners
first
federal
habeas
corpus
review
interpreted
statutory
ambiguities
accordingly
stewart
held
federal
habeas
petition
filed
initial
filing
dismissed
premature
deemed
second
successive
petition
barred
lest
dismissal
technical
procedural
reasons
bar
prisoner
ever
obtaining
federal
habeas
review
slack
mcdaniel
held
federal
habeas
petition
filed
dismissal
initial
filing
nonexhaustion
deemed
second
successive
petition
lest
complete
exhaustion
rule
become
unwary
pro
se
prisoner
quoting
rose
supra
making
assumption
interpret
ambiguous
provision
us
permit
tolling
federal
habeas
petitions
slack
discerned
purpose
ambiguous
statutory
provision
assuming
absent
contrary
indication
congressional
purpose
mirror
reasonable
human
beings
knowledgeable
area
law
question
kept
purposes
firmly
foremost
mind
sought
understand
statute
see
slack
supra
supra
refusing
adopt
interpretation
whose
implications
habeas
practice
far
reaching
seemingly
perverse
today
takes
different
approach
approach
looks
primarily
though
exclusively
linguistic
canons
dispel
uncertainties
caused
ambiguity
statutory
language
ambiguous
believe
priorities
misplaced
language
dictionaries
canons
unilluminated
purpose
lead
courts
blind
alleys
producing
rigid
interpretations
harm
statute
affects
generalized
approach
bit
bit
divorce
law
needs
lives
values
meant
serve
unfortunate
result
people
live
lives
law
light
right
slack
see
purpose
key
statute
meaning
understand
congress
intending
wrong
reverse
interpretive
priorities
respect
dissent
footnotes
see
gaskins
duval
ross
artuz
burns
morton
brown
angelone
flores
austin
mitchell
lindh
murphy
en
banc
rev
grounds
ford
bowersox
calderon
district
overruled
grounds
hoggro
boone
wilcox
florida
dept
corrections
question
whether
claim
exhausted
often
difficult
one
prisoners
unschooled
immense
complexities
federal
habeas
corpus
law
see
post
breyer
dissenting
also
district
courts
see
morgan
bennett
disagreeing
district
conclusion
claim
exhausted
bear
boone
thus
resolved
case
based
reading
supp
therefore
reach
question
whether
exercise
equitable
powers
exclude
time
first
habeas
petition
pending
free
consider
issue
remand