HILL

v.

SPARKMAN, WARDEN, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Moore v. Crosby, 321 F.3d 1377 (11th Cir. 2003)
  …f at all, does the belated appeal relate back for purposes of tolling the AEDPA’s one-year statute of limitations. An analogous case from this circuit, although not directly on point, is Tinker v. Moore, 255 F. 3d 1331 (11th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1144, 122 S.Ct. 1101, 151 L.Ed.2d 997 (2002). In Tinker, the defendant argued that his properly filed state-court petition for collateral relief had the effect of tolling the AEDPA’s limitations period even though the state petition was filed beyond th…
• United States v. Suarez, 313 F.3d 1287 (11th Cir. 2002)
  …by itself to sustain a § 924(c) conviction,” a conviction was supported -by “a showing of some nexus between the firearm and the drug selling operation.” Id. at 1252-53 (citing United States v. Finley, 245 F. 3d 199, 202 (2d Cir.2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1144, 122 S.Ct. 1101, 151 L.Ed.2d 997 (2002)). We adopted the Fifth Circuit’s list of factors to aid in, among other things, “distinguishing] possession in furtherance of a crime from innocent possession of a wall-mounted antique or an unloaded hunting…
• Metzler v. Warden (N.D. Fla. 2024)
  …at § 2244(d)(2) statutory tolling to apply, the petitioner must file his state collateral petition before the one-year period for filing his federal habeas petition has run.”); Tinker v. Moore, 255 F.3d 1331, 1335 n.4 (11th Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1144 (2002) (“We remind petitioners that a properly and timely filed petition in state court only tolls the time remaining within the federal limitation period.”); Webster v. Moore, 199 F.3d 1256, 1259 (11th Cir. 2000) (“Under § 2244(d)(2), even 'properl…