Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Criminal Procedure — habeas corpus — forfeiture

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//April 24, 2012//

Criminal Procedure — habeas corpus — forfeiture

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//April 24, 2012//

Listen to this article

U.S. Supreme Court

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — habeas corpus — forfeiture

Courts of appeals, like district courts, have the authority, though not the obligation, to raise a forfeited timeliness defense on their own initiative in exceptional cases.

The Tenth Circuit abused its discretion when it dismissed Wood’s petition as untimely. In the District Court, the State was well aware of the statute of limitations defense available to it, and of the arguments that could be made in support of that defense. Yet, the State twice informed the District Court that it would not “challenge” the timeliness of Wood’s petition. In so doing, the State deliberately waived the statute of limitations defense. In light of that waiver, the Tenth Circuit should have followed the District Court’s lead and decided the merits of Wood’s petition.

403 Fed. Appx. 335, reversed and remanded.

10-9995 Wood v. Milyard

Ginsburg, J.; Thomas, J., concurring.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

Case Digests

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests