Capital Habeas Matter Involving Atkins Claim, and Property Issue

In Mathis v. Thaler, No. 08-70021, a capital habeas matter, the court affirmed the denial of petitioner's habeas petition where 1) petitioner's habeas litigation strategy choice to withhold an Atkins claim from the initial federal petition, while simultaneously acting so late as to preclude exploration of other relief, did not make the Atkins rule "previously unavailable" to him within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. section 2244(b)(2)(A); 2) petitioner offered no cogent argument to excuse his failure to include his Atkins claim in his first federal petition when that claim was available to him for nine months after Atkins was decided; and 3) petitioner was not entitled to equitable tolling.

Dunbar v. Seger-Thomschitz, No. 09-30717, concerned an action to quiet title to a painting based on plaintiff's ownership by acquisitive prescription under Louisiana law and the fact that defendant's claims were barred by Louisiana's prescriptive laws.

Related Resources

• Full Text of Mathis v. Thaler, No. 08-70021
• Full Text of Dunbar v. Seger-Thomschitz, No. 09-30717