Deadline to challenge convictions
Porras v. Payne
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Bryan Porras asked the Supreme Court to review when the deadline for his federal habeas petition began after his direct appeal ended in an intermediate Arkansas court, and whether he could get a certificate of appealability or more time under equitable tolling (a deadline extension).
- Who it affects
- The Supreme Court did not decide whether Porras’s petition was late or whether he qualified for more time.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.

What it's about
The Court refused to hear the case (denied review) and did not decide those questions.
The dispute concerned how the federal deadline for challenging a state conviction applies when a direct appeal ends in an intermediate state court and further state review was available.
Question presented
1. Whether, for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A), a state criminal judgment becomes final upon expiration of the ninety-day period for seeking a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court when the petitioner’s direct appeal concluded in an intermediate state appellate court and discretionary review in the state’s highest court was available but not sought. 2. Whether a certificate of appealability should issue where reasonable jurists could debate the proper interpretation of § 2244(d)(1)(A), the applicability of this Court’s finality jurisprudence, and the availability of equitable tolling under AEDPA. 3. Whether equitable tolling is available where a petitioner diligently pursued his rights and the timeliness dispute arose from reasonable uncertainty concerning the interaction of state discretionary-review procedures and AEDPA’s finality provisions.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.