Gonzalez v. Crosby (545 U.S. 524)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 23, 2005 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
545 U.S. 524 · 125 S. Ct. 2641
Decided
June 23, 2005
Term
October Term 2004
Vote
7–2
Majority author
Justice Scalia
Issue area
Judicial Power
Disposition
Affirmed
Outcome
Petitioning party lost
Ideological direction
Conservative

Opinion excerpt

Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. After the federal courts denied petitioner habeas corpus relief from his state conviction, he filed a motion for relief from that judgment, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). The question presented is whether, in a habeas case, such motions are subject to the additional restrictions that apply to “second or successive” habeas corpus petitions under the provisions of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), codified at 28 U. S. C. § 2244(b). I Petitioner Aurelio Gonzalez pleaded guilty in Florida Circuit Court to one count of robbery with a firearm. He filed no appeal and began serving his 99-year sentence in 1982. Some 12 years later, petitioner began to seek relief from his conviction. He filed two motions for state postconviction relief, which the Florida courts denied. Thereafter, in June 1997, petitioner filed a federal habeas petition in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, alleging that his guilty plea had hot been entered knowingly and voluntarily. Upon the State’s motion, the District Court dismissed petitioner’s habeas petition as barred by AEDPA’s statute of limitations, 28 U. S. C. § 2244(d). Under Eleventh Circuit precedent, petitioner’s filing deadline, absent tolling, was April 23,1997, one year after AEDPA’s statute of limitations took…

Excerpt of a 26,275-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database