October Term 2004 · Docket 03-9627

Does a state post-conviction filing toll the federal habeas deadline?

The dispute centers on whether a state post-conviction filing stops the federal habeas clock.

Official caption
Pace v. DiGuglielmo
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Wycoff argued state filings toll the federal deadline.

    Eisenberg argued Pennsylvania uses a flat one-year limit.

    Wycoff claimed Pace presented federal waiver-overcoming claims.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Pace seeks federal habeas review. The warden argues the deadline expired. The case tests the tolling effect of state filings.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 28, 2005.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Pace wants the state filing to toll the federal deadline.

The warden wants the federal deadline to remain strict.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Pace argues state filings pause the federal clock.

The warden argues state filings do not toll the deadline.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Scalia asked if unpleaded exceptions defeat proper filing.

Justice Kennedy asked about Pennsylvania claim-by-claim pleading rules.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the interaction between state and federal deadlines. It determines when a prisoner loses federal review rights. The outcome shapes access to federal courts for state inmates.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON