October Term 2004 · Docket 04-5286

When does the one-year clock start for a federal prisoner's second habeas petition?

the side that brought the case argues the deadline starts when a new legal rule emerges. The government argues it starts when the first petition ends.

Official caption
Dodd v. United States
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

    Ms. Bergmann argued the one-year period has two possible start dates.

    Mr. Feldman argued the government's interpretation limits relief further.

    Justice Breyer asked why the government's view might be better.

    Justice Souter asked why a district court decision should not give notice.

    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

This case tests the start date for a one-year filing limit. The limit applies to federal prisoners seeking a second habeas review. The parties disagree on the triggering event for this deadline.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 22, 2005.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case wants the clock to start when a new legal rule appears.

The government wants the clock to start when the first petition concludes.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case claims a new rule triggers the one-year deadline.

The government claims the end of the first petition triggers the deadline.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Rehnquist asked what relief a nullity actually allows.

Justice O'Connor asked which court determines retroactivity under the statute.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

Prisoners face strict deadlines to challenge their convictions. A late filing bars all further review. The start date defines who gets a second chance.

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