Perry v. Brown

Defendant was entitled to remand of appeal of Dist. Ct.'s dismissal of his section 2254 petition, where Dist. Ct. hd found that said petition was untimely because defendant had previously spent more than one year litigating two state-court petitions for collateral relief, where first petition had been dismissed to allow defendant, who suffers from aphasia that limits his ability to speak, write or understand words, could obtain new counsel, and where state court dismissed second petition upon finding that first petition had been dismissed with prejudice. While time spent on second state-court petition counted towards applicable one-year period for filing instant section 2254 petition, remand was required to explore defendant’s claim for application of equitable tolling based on his aphasia condition and his claim that his mental condition caused his delay in seeking review under section 2254.