Peterson v. Demskie, Docket No. 96-2878

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit)
Writing for the CourtJON O. NEWMAN
Citation107 F.3d 92
PartiesWayne PETERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. J.A. DEMSKIE, Superintendent, Woodbourne Correctional Facility, Respondent-Appellee.
Docket NumberDocket No. 96-2878
Decision Date05 February 1997

Page 92

107 F.3d 92
Wayne PETERSON, Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
J.A. DEMSKIE, Superintendent, Woodbourne Correctional
Facility, Respondent-Appellee.
Docket No. 96-2878.
United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.
Submitted Dec. 4, 1996.
Decided Feb. 5, 1997.

Wayne Peterson, Woodbourne, NY, appellant, pro se.

David R. Huey, Executive Asst. Dist. Atty., Goshen, NY, for appellee.

Before: NEWMAN, Chief Judge, OAKES and WINTER, Circuit Judges.

JON O. NEWMAN, Chief Judge:

This motion for a certificate of appealability ("COA") by a state prisoner seeking to appeal the denial of a petition for habeas corpus concerns the timeliness of a petition filed shortly after the effective date of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"), Pub.L.No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214 (1996). Wayne Peterson, proceeding pro se, seeks a COA in order to appeal the September 24, 1996, judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York (Charles L. Brieant, Judge), dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that the petition was filed more than one year after state court remedies had been exhausted. We conclude that a habeas corpus petitioner is entitled to a reasonable time after the effective date of the AEDPA to file a petition, and that Peterson's petition, filed 72 days after the effective date was filed within a reasonable time. We therefore grant a COA, and reverse and remand for further consideration of the petition.

Page 93

Background

Peterson was convicted in 1974 in the Orange County (N.Y.) Court of second degree murder and other offenses. His conviction was affirmed, People v. Peterson, 64 A.D.2d 875, 407 N.Y.S.2d 770 (2d Dep't 1978) (table), and leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals was denied, People v. Peterson, 45 N.Y.2d 823, 409 N.Y.S.2d 1054, 381 N.E.2d 625 (1978). Peterson filed his federal habeas corpus petition in the District Court on July 5, 1996. Judge Brieant dismissed the petition as time-barred by the AEDPA because the petition was filed more than one year after the conclusion of state court direct review. See AEDPA, § 101 (to be codified at 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A)).

Peterson then moved in this Court for a COA. See AEDPA, § 103 (amending Fed.R.App.P. 22). By order to show cause, we afforded the State an opportunity to oppose appellant's motion and directed the State's attention to the timeliness issue.

Discussion

In Reyes v. Keane, 90 F.3d 676 (2d Cir.1996), we...

To continue reading

Request your trial
101 cases
  • Rogers v. U.S.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • 5 d3 Maio d3 1999
    ...petitioners to develop evidence and legal theories, in rejecting ad hoc "reasonable time" rule put forth in dicta in Peterson v. Demskie, 107 F.3d 92, 93 (2d Cir.1997)). Therefore, for causes of action accruing 12 before AEDPA's effective date, the grace period for filing a § 2255 motion en......
  • Evans v. Artuz, 97 CV 3017(RR).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • 30 d4 Setembro d4 1999
    ...This court granted the motion, relying on the "reasonable" time standard endorsed by the Court of Appeals in Peterson v. Demskie, 107 F.3d 92 (2d Cir.1997). See Evans v. Artuz, 68 F.Supp.2d 188 (E.D.N.Y.1999). The Second Circuit subsequently reconsidered Peterson in Ross v. Artuz, 150 F.3d ......
  • Metts v. Miller, 96-CV-4191(RR)(RML).
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • 12 d5 Dezembro d5 1997
    ...after the effective date of AEDPA, not to exceed one year, to file what would otherwise be a time-barred petition. Peterson v. Demskie, 107 F.3d 92, 93 (2d Cir.1997). In Peterson, the Second Circuit concluded that a habeas petition filed eighteen years after the conclusion of state court re......
  • Roldan v. Artuz
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • 6 d4 Janeiro d4 2000
    ...Roldan's petition as untimely under the AEDPA statute of limitations, as then-interpreted by the Second Circuit in Peterson v. Demskie, 107 F.3d 92, 93 (2d Cir. 1997). See Roldan v. Artuz, 976 F.Supp. at 253-54. On December 17, 1998, Second Circuit remanded in light of its decision in Ross ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT