King v. Bell

This case already has a three-year history, although the would-be petitioner, Tommy King, has yet successfully to file his petition for habeas relief. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a). Because our decision in Abela v. Martin, 348 F.3d 164, 172-73 (6th Cir. 2003) (en banc), cert. denied sub nom. Caruso v. Abela, 124 S. Ct. 2388 (2004), and the doctrine of equitable tolling preclude the government from asserting a valid statute of limitations defense in this case, we reverse the grant of summary judgment against King and remand for consideration of the merits of his petition.