Keal

Keal v. Blodgett

Good Law
48 F. App'x 235
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 27, 2002No. 00-35611; D.C. No. CV-99-05265-FDBCalifornia754 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Ronald Keal appeals the district court’s decision that his petition for writ of habeas corpus is untimely. We affirm. Because the facts are familiar to the parties, we recount them only as necessary to explain our decision.

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 [“AEDPA”], Pub.L. No. 104-132, codified in 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d), establishes a one-year statute of limitations for filing a writ of habeas corpus in federal court. This one-year period generally starts running when the judgment in state court becomes “final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review.” 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1)(A). All parties agree that if Real’s one-year period began running at the time of final judgment, May 5, 1997, his current petition is untimely.

AEDPA, however, provides several grounds for delaying the start of the one-year period. Section 2244(d)(1)(D) provides that the one-year period does not commence until “the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence.” 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1)(D). Keal argues in his opening brief that the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.