Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
21 Alabama opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2026 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alabama courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ex Parte Wardgreen2 sentences2026Thus, we need not consider those requirements because Belcher wholly relies on the doctrine of equitable tolling, as articulated in Ex parte Ward, 46 So. 3d 888, 896 (Ala. 2007). 2026Thus, we need not consider those requirements because Belcher wholly relies on the doctrine of equitable tolling, as articulated in Ex parte Ward, 46 So. 3d 888, 896 (Ala. 2007). | 9 | 15 |
Drew v. Department of Correctionsred2 sentences2017See Spitsyn v. Moore, 345 F.3d [796] at 799 [ (9th Cir. 2003) ] (holding that the burden is on the petitioner for the writ of habeas corpus to show that the exclusion applies and that the ‘extraordinary circumstances’ alleged, rather than a lack of diligence on his part, were the proximate cause of the untimeliness); Drew v. Department of Corr., 297 F.3d 1278, 1286 (11th Cir. 2002) (‘The burden of establishing entitlement ’ to this extraordinary remedy plainly rests with the petitioner.’). 2016See Spitsyn v. Moore, 345 F.3d [796,] 799 [ (9th Cir. 2003) ] (holding that the burden is on the petitioner for the writ of habeas corpus to show that the exclusion applies and that the “extraordinary circumstances” alleged, rather than a lack of diligence on his part, were the proximate cause of the untimeliness); Drew v. Department of Corr., 297 F.3d 1278, 1286 (11th Cir. 2002) (“The burden of establishing entitlement to this extraordinary remedy plainly rests with the petitioner.”).’ “Ward, 46 So.3d ‘at 897. | 9 | 10 |
State v. Bakergreen2 sentences2026Crim. P." Id. (emphasis added). 2026Crim. P." State v. Baker, 172 So. 3d 860, 866 (Ala. Crim. App. 2015) (emphasis added). | 3 | 4 |
Sergey Spitsyn v. Robert Moore, Wardengreen2 sentences2009See Spitsyn v. Moore, 345 F.3d at 799 (holding that the *621 burden is on the petitioner for the writ of habeas corpus to show that the exclusion applies and that the ‘extraordinary circumstances’ alleged, rather than a lack of diligence on his part, were the proximate cause of the untimeliness); Drew v. Department of Corr., 297 F.3d 1278, 1286 (11th Cir.2002)(‘The burden of establishing entitlement to this extraordinary remedy plainly rests with the petitioner.’). 2007See Spitsyn v. Moore, 345 F.3d at 799 (holding that the burden is on the petitioner for the writ of habeas corpus to show that the exclusion applies and that the “extraordinary circumstances” alleged, rather than a lack of diligence on his part, were the proximate cause of the untimeliness); Drew v. Department of Corr., 297 F.3d 1278, 1286 (11th Cir.2002) (“The burden of establishing entitlement to this extraordinary remedy plainly rests with the petitioner.”). | 3 | 3 |
Ex Parte Wardgreen2 sentences2010Quoting Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314, 328 , 107 S.Ct. 708 , 93 L.Ed.2d 649 (1987), the Alabama Supreme Court in Ward V found that “ ‘a new rule for the conduct of criminal prosecutions is to be applied retroactively to all cases, state or federal, pending on direct review or not yet final,’ ” and, thus, that ‘Ward should have the opportunity to assert the doctrine of equitable tolling.” 46 So.3d at 902 . 2010In light of the fact that the doctrine of equitable tolling is a newly recognized exception to the limitations provision of Rule 32.2(c), that it was Ward who argued successfully before this Court that the doctrine should be adopted, and that this is a capital case, we hold that Ward should have the opportunity to assert the doctrine of equitable tolling.” Ex parte Ward, 46 So.3d 898, 901-02 (Ala.2010) (“Ward V”). | 1 | 2 |
Kuenzel v. Stategreen1 sentence2023Moreover, '[b]ecause the limitations provision is mandatory and applies in all but the most extraordinary of circumstances, when a petition is time-barred on its face the petitioner bears the burden of demonstrating in his petition that there are such extraordinary circumstances justifying the application of the doctrine of equitable tolling.' Ex parte Ward, 46 So. 3d at 897 . 'A petition that does not assert equitable tolling, or that asserts it but fails to state any principle of law or any fact that would entitle the petitioner to the equitable tolling of the applicable limitations provisio | 1 | 1 |
United States v. James Marcello and Anthony Zizzogreen1 sentence2015Nevertheless, ‘the threshold necessary to trigger equitable tolling is very high, lest the exceptions swallow the rule.’ United States v. Marcello, 212 F.3d 1005, 1010 (7th Cir. 2000). | 1 | 1 |
Weaver v. Firestonegreen1 sentence2015See Weaver v. Firestone, 155 So.3d 952, 957-68 (Ala.2013) (discussing equitable tolling in the context of statutes of limitations). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alabama. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Griffith v. Kentucky
green
2 sentences2010Quoting Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314, 328 , 107 S.Ct. 708 , 93 L.Ed.2d 649 (1987), the Alabama Supreme Court in Ward V found that “ ‘a new rule for the conduct of criminal prosecutions is to be applied retroactively to all cases, state or federal, pending on direct review or not yet final,’ ” and, thus, that ‘Ward should have the opportunity to assert the doctrine of equitable tolling.” 46 So.3d at 902 . 2010Quoting Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314, 328 , 107 S.Ct. 708 , 93 L.Ed.2d 649 (1987), the Alabama Supreme Court in Ward V found that “ ‘a new rule for the conduct of criminal prosecutions is to be applied retroactively to all cases, state or federal, pending on direct review or not yet final,’ ” and, thus, that ‘Ward should have the opportunity to assert the doctrine of equitable tolling.” 46 So.3d at 902 . | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Patrick v. State
green
1 sentence2017In Patrick v. State, 91 So.3d 756 (Ala. Crim. App. 2011), 5 this Court stated: “In the instant case, Patrick asserted in his Rule 32 petition that the doctrine of equitable tolling should apply in his ease. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs
green
2 sentences2015He does not believe the facts before us present an extraordinary circumstance warranting the application of the doctrine of équitable tolling, whereas I do. 5 The United States Supreme' Court has stated: “We have allowed equitable tolling in situations where the claimant has actively pm-sued his judicial remedies by filing a defective pleading during the statutory period” and that “[wje generally have been much less forgiving in receiving late’‘filings where the claimant failed to exercise due diligence in preserving his legal rights.” Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89, 96 , 2015He does not believe the facts before us present an extraordinary circumstance warranting the application of the doctrine of équitable tolling, whereas I do. 5 The United States Supreme' Court has stated: “We have allowed equitable tolling in situations where the claimant has actively pm-sued his judicial remedies by filing a defective pleading during the statutory period” and that “[wje generally have been much less forgiving in receiving late’‘filings where the claimant failed to exercise due diligence in preserving his legal rights.” Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89, 96 , | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Pace v. DiGuglielmo
green
2 sentences2013Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 418 , 125 S.Ct. 1807 , 161 L.Ed.2d 669 (2005). 2013Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 418 , 125 S.Ct. 1807 , 161 L.Ed.2d 669 (2005). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Davenport v. State
green
1 sentence2011See Ex parte Ward, 46 So.3d 888 (Ala.2007); Davenport v. State, 987 So.2d 652 (Ala.Crim. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Ex Parte Martinez, 1061237 (Ala. 5-29-2009)
neutral
2 sentences2010Initially, this Court was not entirely sure what the Alabama Supreme Court’s remand directions in Martinez meant when that Court stated: “ ‘[W]e reverse the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals and remand the case to that court for consideration of Martinez’s claim that he is entitled to the remedy afforded by the doctrine of equitable tolling and, if it decides that he is, whether the trial court was correct in denying Martinez’s petition.’ ” *623 Martinez, 75 So.3d at 621 . 2010Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals and remand the case to that court for consideration of Martinez’s claim that he is entitled to the remedy afforded by the doctrine of equitable tolling and, if it decides that he is, whether the trial court was correct in denying Martinez’s petition.’ “Martinez, 75 So.3d at 621 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.