Rose v. Commissioner of Correction

Summary

The court held that the habeas court clearly erred in finding that prior counsel advised the petitioner to refile his habeas petition immediately, because the hearing evidence showed only advice to withdraw the earlier petition and did not establish any refiling deadline. The court also held that ineffective assistance of habeas counsel may constitute an external objective factor supporting good cause under the habeas filing statute, but it declined to decide whether counsel was ineffective because the habeas court made no findings on that issue. The judgment was reversed and the matter was remanded for a new hearing and good-cause determination.