Woodford v. Garceau, 538 U.S. 202, 11 (2003)

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

212

WOODFORD v. GARCEAU

O'Connor, J., concurring in judgment

of habeas corpus is not necessary to trigger the beginning of a habeas proceeding. See, e. g., 28 U. S. C. §§ 2251, 2262.

I agree, however, with the Court's conclusion that the post-AEDPA version of § 2254 is applicable to Garceau's case. The text of § 2254 itself provides the answer. Both before and after AEDPA, § 2254 has concerned only applications for a writ of habeas corpus. Compare § 2254(a) ("The Supreme Court, a Justice thereof, a circuit judge, or a district court shall entertain an application for a writ of habeas corpus . . ." (emphasis added)) with 28 U. S. C. § 2254(a) (1994 ed.) (same). Indeed, only the filing of an application for a writ of habeas corpus triggered the former version of § 2254(d). See 28 U. S. C. § 2254(d) (1994 ed.) ("In any proceeding instituted in a Federal court by an application for a writ of habeas corpus . . ."). Thus, although Garceau's pre-application filings trigger a habeas corpus proceeding sufficient to permit the District Court to grant a stay under 28 U. S. C. § 2251 and to engage in other activity related to the case, these filings do not answer whether the pre- or post-AEDPA version of § 2254(d) applies here. Because § 2254 has always spoken in terms of "applications," a case is pending for § 2254 purposes only when the prisoner files an application for a writ of habeas corpus.

I acknowledge that some language in Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U. S. 320 (1997), and in McFarland, supra, can be read to say that if a habeas case is pending before AEDPA, none of AEDPA's amendments apply—including the amendments to § 2254. But these statements do not answer the question in this case. If § 2254 applied to habeas proceedings other than applications for a writ of habeas corpus, the answer might well be different. Compare 28 U. S. C. § 2251 (a judge, "before whom a habeas corpus proceeding is pending, may . . . stay any proceeding") with § 2254(e)(1) ("In a proceeding instituted by an application for a writ of habeas corpus . . ."). But as the Court correctly points out, ante, at 207-208, § 2254 applies only once a prisoner has filed "an application for a

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007