Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the above-styled Texas non-death penalty case, involving the time limits to file an appeal under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). The SCOTUSblog case file in Gonzalez v. Thaler contains all briefing in the case.
The transcript of oral arguments is available in Adobe .pdf format.
SCOTUSblog has the only coverage of oral arguments that I've seen, "Gonzalez v. Thaler: Justices focus on COA issue," by Giovanna Shay. Here's the beginning of this detailed account:
At oral argument in the Texas state prisoner’s federal habeas case Gonzalez v. Thaler Wednesday morning, the Justices focused primarily on whether all three requirements for a certificate of appealability (COA) under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) are jurisdictional. The issue that initially brought this case to the Court – what event triggers the one-year clock for a state prisoner to file a federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1) of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) – received relatively less air time. A majority of the Court seemed at least somewhat sympathetic to the notion that a technical defect in a COA should not produce a jurisdictional bar to a habeas appeal. However, even some Justices who are typically protective of habeas rights appeared unconvinced by petitioner Gonzalez’s interpretation of the AEDPA triggering provision. In rebuttal, Gonzalez’s counsel spoke directly to Justice Kagan, arguing that the state’s interpretation of the AEDPA triggering provision would disadvantage the ninety-nine percent of Texas criminal defendants who do not file petitions for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
Comments