United States Ninth Circuit

In a habeas petition brought by a petitioner serving a life sentence for three murders by arson that he claimed he did not commit, a dismissal of the petition as untimely is reversed where 28 U.S.C. section 2244(d)(1)(D) did not require that petitioners exercise the maximum diligence possible in uncovering the factual bases of their claims, but only "due" or "reasonable" diligence.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/20/2010
• Published 09/20/2010

Judges

• M. Margaret McKeown

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Randall S. Luskey, Kathleen A. McKenna