Jay R. Thompson v. Richard Brown
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
Wood, Chief Judge.
Jay Thompson's efforts to obtain a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 foundered, as so many do, on procedural default-specifically, the decision of Indiana's judiciary to reject his postconviction petition under that state's laches doctrine. The state court relied on delays that took place after Thompson had filed his postconviction petition-delays for which Thompson was responsible, the state court ruled, for failing to "prosecute" his case.
But when the state court dismissed the petition there was not yet a firmly established and regularly followed rule in Indiana…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Coleman v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Walker v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Alfred Albrecht, Sr., in No. 04-9006 v. Martin Horn, Commissioner, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, in No. 04-9005Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- Kaczmarek v. RednourCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
- Twyman v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1984
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Jay Thompson v. Frank VanihelCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2021
- TUCK v. ZATECKYDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2020