Jimenez v. Quarterman - UPDATED

Earlier today, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in the Texas case of Jimenez v. Quarterman.  The unanimous opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas is here.  The case was argued before the Court on November 4.

At The BLT, Tony Mauro writes, "A Double Victory for Criminal Defendants," which references Jimenez and another case.

The other decision, Jimenez v. Quarterman, is a Texas case authored by Justice Thomas for a unanimous Court. Thomas ruled that because Texas allows defendants to file untimely appeals of state convictions, the clock for the one-year deadline for filing a federal habeas appeal under Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act should not start ticking until after that out-of-time appeal is completed.

In SCOTUS Blog's, "Court limits “violent felony” definition," Lyle Denniston also mentions Jimenez.

That was one of two rulings the Court issued on returning from a four-week holiday and year-end recess.  In the second, Jiminez v. Quarterman (07-6984), a unanimous Court decided that, if a state prisoner is allowed by a state court to file an appeal that ordinarily would be too late, that will delay the start of the one-year filing period for pursuing a habeas challenge until after the state appeal is resolved.  Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion, declaring that a state conviction is not final for federal habeas purposes when a state has allowed an out-of-time, direct appeal of the conviction.  The ruling camed in a case involving a Texas inmate, Carlos Jimenez, who is serving a 43-year prison term for burglarizing a home, with the sentence enhanced because of a prison conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon.

UPDATE -- Here's what the ABA Criminal Justice Section had to say about Jimenez:

In a second criminal case, the court unanimously ruled for a Texas prison inmate seeking federal review of his 43-year prison term. The court interpreted a dead line determining when a judgment is final for purposes of section 28 U.S.C. 2244 (d)(1)(A). The USSC held that a federal appeals court in New Orleans was wrong to find that Carlos Jiminez had missed a deadline for filing his paperwork in federal court. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion, holding that where a state court grants a criminal defendant the right to file an out-of-time direct appeal during state collateral review, but before the defendant has first sought federal habeas relief, his judgment is not "final" for purposes of section .2244 (d)(1)(A) until the conclusion of the out-of-time direct appeal, or the expiration of the time for seeking certiorari review of the appeal.