Wall v. Kholi

Docket No.	Op. Below	Argument	Opinion	Vote	Author	Term
09-868	1st Cir.	Nov 29, 2010 Tr.Aud.	Mar 7, 2011	9-0	Alito	OT 2010

Holding: Because the phrase "collateral review" in AEDPA means judicial review of a judgment in a proceeding that is not part of direct review, state proceedings on an inmate's motion to reduce his sentence tolled the time to file his federal habeas petition.

Plain English Holding: Inmates generally have one year to file a federal petition for habeas corpus to challenge their state conviction after that conviction becomes final. However, the time spent in state court on a motion to reduce the inmate’s sentence does not count toward the one-year statute of limitations.

Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Samuel Alito on March 7, 2011. Justice Scalia concurred in part.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

• Last week's opinions in Plain English (Lisa McElroy)
• Argument recap: Parsing the scope of “collateral review” under AEDPA’s tolling provision (Anne Lee)
• Argument preview: Do post-conviction pleas for leniency stop the clock on the statute of limitations for federal habeas petitions? (Anne Lee)
• No review of "must-carry" rule (Lyle Denniston)

Briefs and Documents

Merits Briefs

• Brief for Petitioners A.T. Wall, Director, Rhode Island Department of Corrections
• Brief for Respondent Khalil Kholi
• Reply Brief for Petitioner A.T. Wall, Director, Rhode Island Department of Corrections

Amicus Briefs

• Brief for the States of Delaware, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming in Support of Petitioners

Certiorari-Stage Documents

• Opinion Below (1st Circuit)
• Petition for certiorari (unavailable)
• Brief in opposition (unavailable)
• Petitioner’s reply (unavailable)