California Supreme Court
In re Reno
October 31, 2012
Summary
The court addressed a 521-page second state habeas petition containing 143 claims and concluded that the petition exemplified abusive successive-writ practice because most claims were repetitive, untimely, or unsupported by specific reasons excusing their delayed presentation. It reaffirmed strict pleading requirements for timeliness and successive petitions, adopted page limits and disclosure requirements for future capital-case exhaustion petitions, and declined to impose financial sanctions in this case while reserving that option for the future. The visible text does not include the final disposition of the petition.