Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Clay v. United States

Docket No.: 01-1500
Certiorari Granted: Jun 28 2002
Argued: January 13, 2003
Decided: March 4, 2003

Topics:

28 USC 2241-2255 (habeas corpus), Criminal Procedure, Habeas Corpus, Appellate Procedure, Death Penalty, False Claims Act, Medicaid, Medicare, RICO, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, Sherman Act, Speedy Trial, Speedy Trial Act, antitrust, habeas, habeas corpus, retaliation, stare decisis

PartyNames: Erick Cornell Clay v. United States
Petitioner: Erick Cornell Clay
Respondent: United States

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Citation: CA 7, No. 00-3671, 1/25/02 unpublished. QUESTION PRESENTED A federal prisoner generally must file a post-conviction motion under 28 U.S.C.2255 within one year of "the date on which [his] judgment of conviction becomes final." In cases in which the defendant loses on direct appeal but does not seekcertiorari, the circuits have divided over the meaning of "final," a term not defined by the statute. As the government explaine d on appeal in this case, "[Petitioner] argues, and the Solicitor General agrees, th at his judgment of conviction did not become final until the time for filing a petition for a writ of certiorari had elapsed."The Seventh Circuit nonetheless adhered to its contrary precedent, which holds that
Supreme Court Docket

Erick Cornell Clay
v.
United States
537 U.S. 522 (2003)
Consideration Limited:

Limited to the following question: Whether petitioner's judgment of conviction became "final" within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 2255 para.6(1) one year after the court of appeals issued its mandate ondirect appeal or one year after his time for filing a petition for a writ of certiorari expired. ORDERED: 8/26/02 The order granting the petition for a writ of certiorari is amended to read as follows:The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to the following question: Whether petitioner's judgment of conviction became "final" within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 2255, para. 6(1) when the court of appeals issued its mandate on direct appeal or when his time for filing a petition for a writ of certiorari expired.

Question:

Does a judgment become "final" for postconviction relief when the appellate court issues its mandate affirming the conviction where a defendant in a federal prosecution takes an unsuccessful direct appeal from a judgment of conviction but does not next petition for a writ of certiorari from the U.S. Supreme Court?

Clay v. United States
ORAL ARGUMENT

January 13, 2003

Holding: reversed and remanded
Decision: Decision: 9 votes for Clay, 0 vote(s) against

Clay v. United States
Case Documents

1Opinion in Clay v. United States
2Opinion in Clay v. United States
Additional documents for this case are pending review.