Richard Graham v. Thomas G. Borgen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a petition for collateral review filed after the federal habeas statute of limitation period has expired does not toll the one-year limitation period
• holding that a petition for collateral review filed after the federal habeas statute of limitation period has expired does not toll the one-year limitation period
• explaining that a postconviction motion under Wis. Stat. §974.06 does not toll AEDPA’s statute of limitations when the postconviction motion is filed after the one-year statute of limitations already ran
• “The Wisconsin courts’ own interpretation of the statute is certainly a good place to begin to determine whether the review is direct or collateral.”
• state post-conviction application filed after § 2244 limitation period expired has \no tolling effect whatsoever\
• post-conviction motion filed after one-year deadline “had no tolling effect whatsoever on the AEDPA statute of limitation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).