A motion for leave to file a successive federal habeas application in a death penalty case is granted

In re Mathis, No. 06-20806
A motion for leave to file a successive federal habeas application in a death penalty case is granted where movant made a prima facie showing of mental retardation for purposes of his Atkins claim.

writ of habeas corpus is granted where:

Fleming v. Evans, No. 06-6110

Sufficiently egregious misconduct on the part of a habeas petitioner's counsel may justify equitable tolling of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) limitations period. In a domestic abuse, assault, and battery case, an application for a certificate of appealability (COA) from a denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus is granted where: 1) there was jurisdiction to review the petition; 2) reasonable jurists would find it debatable whether the district court abused its discretion with respect to equitable tolling and timeliness rulings; and 3) reasonable jurists could debate whether the petition stated a valid constitutional claim of the denial of a constitutional right.

district court erred in finding that the petition was untimely

Pierson v. Dormire, No. 06-2545

Denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which challenged a conviction for robbery and armed criminal action, is reversed where the district court erred in finding that the petition was untimely. Under Nichols v. Bowersox, 172 F.3d 1068 (8th Cir. 1999), a Missouri state prisoner's judgment becomes final within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. section 2244(d)(1)(A) exactly ninety days after his conviction is affirmed on direct appeal, even if he has not filed a motion for transfer to the Missouri Supreme Court.

Bad Cases Make Good Law

Smith v. Texas, No. 05-11287

In a first-degree murder and death penalty case in which sentencing took place in between the two Penry decisions of the Supreme Court, denial of relief on collateral review is reversed where a state court's errors of federal law regarding preservation of a Penry claim could not be the predicate for requiring him to show egregious harm, and petitioner appeared to be entitled to relief under the applicable state harmless-error framework. Read more...

claim of mental retardation is granted

Ochoa v. Sirmons, No. 06-6349
In a death penalty case, a motion to file second or successive petition for writ of habeas corpus setting forth an Atkins claim of mental retardation is granted where, although the pendency of an appeal from the denial of a first petition does not obviate the need for authorization of newly raised claims, petitioner made the prima facie showing required for authorization to proceed under section 2244(b)(2)(A).

Winning habeas

Owens v. US, No. 05-1784
Denial of a petition for habeas corpus is reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings where the district court's decision to deny evidentiary hearings was an abuse of discretion since: 1) defendant's allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel were not implausible; 2) closure of jury selection to the public for an entire day without meeting the strict Waller requirements would violate a defendant's right to a public trial; 3) failure to object to such a closure might constitute ineffective assistance of counsel; and 4) denial of a public trial is structural error and prejudice must be assumed. The denial of habeas relief is affirmed on all other points.

Brady violation

Trammell v. McKune, No. 06-3316

In a criminal case in which habeas petitioner was accused of stealing a service station tow truck and using it to steal another vehicle, his petition for habeas corpus is granted and his convictions vacated where the prosecution's failure to disclose physical evidence linking another individual to the tow truck theft, when it knew petitioner's defense was that the other man committed the theft, constituted a violation of petitioner's due process rights under Brady