Harper v. Ercole
648 F.3d 132
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- Harper, a New York state prisoner, was convicted in 2002 of first/second-degree robbery and weapon possession, with concurrent terms; convictions affirmed on direct appeal in 2006 and by NY Court of Appeals in 2006.
- AEDPA finality: judgment became final on May 14, 2007, ninety days after the NY Court denied reargument; one-year filing deadline ran to May 14, 2008.
- Harper was hospitalized February 27 to June 3, 2008, during the AEDPA period, undergoing six surgeries and is alleged to have been heavily medicated and unable to access legal papers.
- He filed a § 2254 petition on August 7, 2008, arguing entitlement to equitable tolling due to extraordinary medical circumstances.
- Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal as untimely but assumed tolling for hospitalization; district court adopted and denied on diligence grounds; appellate court vacated and remanded.
- Record shows seventy-eight days remained in the limitations period at tolling start, with tolling ending June 3, 2008 and petition filed August 17, 2008.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Harper qualifies for equitable tolling due to hospitalization. | Harper contends extraordinary circumstances and causation. | Ercole argues untimely filing due to lack of diligence. | Yes; hospitalization constitutes extraordinary circumstances with causation. |
| Whether Harper demonstrated diligence throughout the tolling period and after discharge. | Harper remained diligent, even while recovering, including seeking an extension. | Harper did not show diligence post-discharge. | Harper demonstrated diligence during hospitalization; no further post-tolling diligence required for timeliness. |
Key Cases Cited
- Baldayaque v. United States, 338 F.3d 145 (2d Cir. 2003) (extraordinary circumstances may toll if causation shown)
- Valverde v. Stinson, 224 F.3d 129 (2d Cir. 2000) (causation and tolling duration considerations)
- Holland v. Florida, 130 S. Ct. 2549 (2010) (equitable tolling requires diligence and extraordinary circumstances)
- Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408 (S. Ct. 2005) (tolling limited by diligence; not a general extension of time)
- Zarvela v. Artuz, 254 F.3d 374 (2d Cir. 2001) (full year allowed; stop-clock approach in some contexts)