09-1733 Socha v. Pollard

Listen to this article

Habeas Corpus
AEDPA; equitable tolling

Where a state prisoner thought he would be represented by the Innocence Project for almost a year, and was in segregation with access to the law library only a few hours per month, it was error to deny him an extension to file for habeas corpus.

“[T]he district court erred by focusing too closely on the fact that Socha had not already filed something that he had labeled as his petition. Not only does the motion anticipate an imminent action in which Socha and the state will be adverse, but also the parties have opposing interests on the immediate question, whether to toll the statute of limitations. As Judge Stadtmueller’s order shows, the facts relating to equitable tolling were before the court.

Thus, Socha’s ancillary proceeding satisfied the traditional standing requirements of injury-in-fact, causation, and redressibility. Elk Grove Unified School Dist. v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1, 11-12 (2004).”

Reversed and Remanded.

09-1733 Socha v. Pollard

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Randa, J., Wood, J.

Full Text