Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
An Entity of Type: unit of work, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

Day v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 198 (2006), is a US Supreme Court case involving the one-year statute of limitations for filing habeas corpus petitions that was established by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). In a 5–4 decision, the Court ruled that if the government unintentionally failed to object to the filing of a petition after the AEDPA limitations period has expired, it is not an abuse of discretion for a district court to dismiss sua sponte (on its own initiative) the petition on that basis.

Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • Day v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 198 (2006), is a US Supreme Court case involving the one-year statute of limitations for filing habeas corpus petitions that was established by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). In a 5–4 decision, the Court ruled that if the government unintentionally failed to object to the filing of a petition after the AEDPA limitations period has expired, it is not an abuse of discretion for a district court to dismiss sua sponte (on its own initiative) the petition on that basis. (en)
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 5095135 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 18440 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1081035948 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:arguedate
  • 0001-02-27 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:argueyear
  • 2006 (xsd:integer)
dbp:case
  • Day v. McDonough, (en)
dbp:decidedate
  • 0001-04-25 (xsd:gMonthDay)
dbp:decideyear
  • 2006 (xsd:integer)
dbp:dissent
  • Stevens (en)
  • Scalia (en)
dbp:docket
  • 4 (xsd:integer)
dbp:fullname
  • Patrick A. Day v. James R. McDonough, Interim Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (en)
dbp:holding
  • The State's unintentional failure to object to the filing of a habeas corpus petition after the statute of limitations expired does not prevent a district court from dismissing the petition on its own initiative. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. (en)
dbp:joindissent
  • Breyer (en)
  • Thomas, Breyer (en)
dbp:joinmajority
  • Roberts, Kennedy, Souter, Alito (en)
dbp:justia
dbp:lawsapplied
  • 28 (xsd:integer)
dbp:litigants
  • Day v. McDonough (en)
dbp:majority
  • Ginsburg (en)
dbp:otherSource
  • Supreme Court (en)
dbp:otherUrl
dbp:oyez
dbp:parallelcitations
  • 172800.0 (dbd:second)
dbp:prior
  • 25920.0 (dbd:second)
dbp:uspage
  • 198 (xsd:integer)
dbp:usvol
  • 547 (xsd:integer)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dct:subject
rdf:type
rdfs:comment
  • Day v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 198 (2006), is a US Supreme Court case involving the one-year statute of limitations for filing habeas corpus petitions that was established by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). In a 5–4 decision, the Court ruled that if the government unintentionally failed to object to the filing of a petition after the AEDPA limitations period has expired, it is not an abuse of discretion for a district court to dismiss sua sponte (on its own initiative) the petition on that basis. (en)
rdfs:label
  • Day v. McDonough (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
foaf:name
  • (en)
  • Patrick A. Day v. James R. McDonough, Interim Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections (en)
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License