Gregory Paul Biggs v. William Duncan, Warden

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that there is no “pending” application between separate rounds of collateral review in California courts
• concluding that statutory tolling is unavailable between separate rounds of state habeas review
• holding that only the time period during which a round of state habeas review is 17 pending tolls the statute of limitation and that periods between different rounds of 18 collateral attack are not tolled
• explaining that the statute of limitations is tolled “during the ‘intervals between a lower 13 court decision and a filing of a new petition in a higher court’”
• petitioner 18 not entitled to gap tolling for the period between two separate rounds of petitions
• application for post-conviction relief 17 is pending during the “intervals between a lower court decision and a filing of a new petition in a 18 higher court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).