Citation network
Pliler Vs. Ford
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 21, 2004
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Syllabus October Term, 2003 Pliler V. FordSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States Pliler, Warden V. FordSearch
-
habeas petitions. Rose v. LundySearch
-
district judges have no obligation to act as counsel or paralegal to pro se litigants. See, e.g., McKaskle v. WigginsSearch
-
s reliance on Castro v. UnitedSearch
-
J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Breyer, J., joined. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion. Pliler v. FordSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Pliler V. FordSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 03-221 Cheryl K. Pliler, Warden, Petitioner V. RichardSearch
-
Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court. Under Rose v. LundySearch
-
habeas petitions were timely filed and held that his later petitions related back to the initial petitions. Ford v. HubbardSearch
-
address this, the Ninth Circuit has held that a district court may employ a stay-and-abeyance procedure. See Calderon v. UnitedSearch
-
two warnings. District judges have no obligation to act as counsel or paralegal to pro se litigants. In McKaskle v. WigginsSearch
-
See also Martinez v. CourtSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Brief for Respondent 27 (emphasis in original). Respondent also relies heavily upon Castro v. UnitedSearch
-
a court must direct the State to produce it). Pliler v. FordSearch
-
be appropriate. This is a question for the Ninth Circuit to consider on remand. See ante , at 8. Pliler v. FordSearch
-
is both consistent with those views and correct. I therefore concur in that judgment. Pliler v. FordSearch
-
s opinion is whether the solution in Rose v. LundySearch
-
and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), on the time to file federal habeas petitions. See Duncan v. WalkerSearch
-
s pre-AEDPA decision in Rose v. LundySearch
-
Crews v. HornSearch
-
internal quotation marks omitted)). Pliler v. FordSearch
-
Breyer, J., Dissenting Pliler V. FordSearch
-
In Rose v. LundySearch
-
d)(2). In Duncan v. WalkerSearch
-
the two. It is thus not surprising that nearly every circuit has adopted a similar procedure. E.g. , Crews v. HornSearch
-
Nowaczyk v. WardenSearch
-
Palmer v. CarltonSearch
-
Zarvela v. ArtuzSearch
-
Freeman v. PageSearch
-
Brewer v. JohnsonSearch
-
cf. Mackall v. AngeloneSearch
-
but cf. Akins v. KenneySearch
-
Castro v. UnitedSearch
-
Cheryl K. Pliler, Warden, Petitioner V. RichardSearch
-
of the Court. Under Rose v. LundySearch
-
Ford v. HubbardSearch
-
See Calderon v. UnitedSearch
-
In McKaskle v. WigginsSearch
-
Martinez v. CourtSearch
-
See Duncan v. WalkerSearch
-
In Duncan v. WalkerSearch
-
Mackall v. AngeloneSearch
-
Akins v. KenneySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial