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.
5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 85 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Jimenez v. Quarterman.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jimenez v. Quarterman Anchor | green | “restores the pendency of the direct appeal.” | 27 |
| 2 | Locke v. Saffle | green | “by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review.” | 25 |
| 3 | United States v. Mitchell | green | “aedpa's time bar ... may be raised by a court sua sponte... habeas proceedings are different from ordinary civil litigation and, as a result, our usual presumptions about the adversarial process may be set aside.” | 13 |
| 4 | Fisher v. Gibson | green | “petitions cannot be tolled for time spent in state post-conviction proceedings because petitioner's state applications for post-conviction relief were not filed until after ... the end of the limitations period” | 10 |
| 5 | Gunderson v. Abbott | green | “a state court habeas filing submitted after the ... one-year deadline does not toll the limitations period.” | 10 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.