No. 19-8762
Percy St. George v. Kevin Ransom, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution at Dallas, et al.
IFP
Tags: circuit-court-review civil-rights due-process equitable-tolling extraordinary-circumstances habeas-corpus judicial-discretion procedural-timeliness statute-of-limitations statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
whether-reasonable-jurist-could-debate-third-circuit-court-of-appeals-adoption
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED I. WHETHER REASONABLE JURIST COULD DEBATE THE THIRD CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ADOPTION THATTHE DISTRICT COURT'S RULING THAT APPELLANT'S PETITION WAS UNTIMELY SEE 28 U.S.C. §§2244(d) (1) & ; §2253(c), AND ALSO HAS NOT ARGUABLY DEMONSTRATED ANY BASTS FOR EQUITABLE TOLLING BECAUSE HE HAS NOT SHOWN "THAT HE HAS BEEN A PURSUING HIS RIGHTS DILIGENTLY AND ... THAT SOME EXTRAORDINARY L CIRCUMSTANCE ON THE BASIS OF Holkand v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631, Sf 649 (2010)" CONTRARY TO Shack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000)? J 70 :
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-08-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-05-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 22, 2020)