Anthony Ross v. Christopher Artuz, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that one year is “a reasonable time after [AED-PA] [took] effect for the commencement of suits upon existing causes of action” and that grace period, of that length is “[c]on-stitution[ally] ... require[d]” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• holding that the petitioner’s conviction became final for AEDPA purposes when his time to seek direct review in 7 See Supreme Court Order List 589 (Mar. 19, 2020), www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt/19 (last visited Feb. 7, 2025
• requiring state court prisoners whose convictions became final before April 24, 1996 to file their petitions for habeas corpus on or before April 24,1997
• granting a Rule 60(b)(6) motion to vacate dismissal of prior habeas petition because of Ross v. Artuz
• applying April 24 deadline and clarifying Peterson v. Demskie, 107 F.3d 92 (2d Cir. 1997)
• stating that since statute of limitations applicable to § 2254 and § 2255 petitions is measured in years, “the last day for instituting the [petition] is the anniversary date of the start of the limitations period” (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).