Michigan Federal Habeas Corpus Lawyer

Federal habeas corpus after a Michigan conviction: what it is and what has to happen first

I am Mitchell Bisson, a Grand Rapids appeals lawyer. I have litigated for over 15 years. This page explains how federal habeas corpus works after a Michigan conviction, including the one-year deadline and exhaustion, and it focuses on the state-court steps that come first. I help with those steps: the direct appeal, applications for leave to appeal and a motion for relief from judgment. I do not promise outcomes.

The short answer. A federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. 2254 can be considered only on the ground that a person is in custody in violation of the Constitution or federal law. A petition generally cannot be granted unless the applicant has exhausted the remedies available in the state courts. A one-year period of limitation applies, and the time during which a properly filed application for state post-conviction review is pending is not counted. Nothing here predicts how any case will end.

A common call to my office comes after the Michigan Court of Appeals has affirmed a conviction or the Michigan Supreme Court has denied leave, from someone who has been told the next step is a federal petition. A federal habeas petition is not a second appeal. It is a separate case, and the federal statute allows it only on the ground that a person is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States (28 U.S.C. 2254(a)). A claim that the Michigan courts never had a fair chance to decide generally cannot be granted (28 U.S.C. 2254(b)(1)(A)). Nearly everything that decides whether a federal petition is even possible gets settled earlier, in the Michigan state courts, and that is where my work is.

The deadline is the first thing I look at. The federal period is one year, and in most Michigan cases it starts when the judgment becomes final on direct review or when the time to seek that review runs out (28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(1)(A)). Time while a properly filed state post-conviction application is pending is not counted (28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(2)), but that rule only pauses a clock that is still running. It does not restart one that has run out. Vroman v. Brigano, 346 F.3d 598, 602 (6th Cir. 2003).

This page explains the federal rules as general law so you can see why the state-court steps matter, and then it covers what I do in those steps: the direct appeal, the application to the Michigan Supreme Court, and a motion for relief from judgment under MCR 6.500. It is not advice about a federal petition. Nothing here predicts how any case will end.

The federal rules in plain terms

• The ground. The application is entertained “only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution” or the laws or treaties of the United States. 28 U.S.C. 2254(a)
• Exhaustion. The application generally cannot be granted unless “the applicant has exhausted the remedies available in the courts of the State”. 28 U.S.C. 2254(b)(1)(A)
• The one-year period. “A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to an application” by a person in custody under a state-court judgment. It runs from the latest of four dates, the first of which is “the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review” or the expiration of the time to seek it. 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(1)
• Tolling. “The time during which a properly filed application for State post-conviction” or other collateral review is pending “shall not be counted toward any period of limitation”. 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(2)
• A deferential standard. For a claim a state court decided on the merits, relief is limited to a decision that was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law”. A state court’s factual determination “shall be presumed to be correct”. 28 U.S.C. 2254(d)(1), (e)(1)

If a petition is denied, an appeal from the final order is not available as of right. “Unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability”, an appeal may not be taken, and the certificate may issue only if the applicant has made “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right”. 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)

A claim presented in a second or successive application that was already presented “shall be dismissed”, and before a second application is filed in the district court the applicant must move in the court of appeals for an order authorizing it. 28 U.S.C. 2244(b)

The court may appoint counsel for an applicant who is or becomes financially unable to afford counsel. The ineffectiveness or incompetence of counsel during state or federal collateral post-conviction proceedings “shall not be a ground for relief” in a proceeding under section 2254. 28 U.S.C. 2254(h), (i)

Federal habeas at a glance

The state-court steps that come first

Because exhaustion is required, most of the work that shapes a federal petition happens in the Michigan courts. In a criminal case an appeal of right to the Court of Appeals generally has to be taken within 42 days after entry of the judgment or order appealed from, and an application for leave to appeal is generally due within the later of 6 months after entry or 42 days after the events listed in the rule. MCR 7.204(A)(2); MCR 7.205(A)(2)

1. Trial and sentencing. The record made here is the record the later courts review.
2. Direct appeal. The Michigan Court of Appeals, then an application to the Michigan Supreme Court.
3. Motion for relief from judgment. If claims remain that were not raised on appeal, a motion under MCR 6.502 in the trial court, with an application for leave to appeal from a denial under MCR 6.509.
4. The federal one-year period. Each step above affects when the period starts and whether it is paused.

Michigan state-court steps, deadlines and what each does to the federal clock

The dates in your case depend on when the courts entered their judgments and orders, and I read the register of actions before I give anyone a date.

What has to be done in the Michigan courts before a federal petition can be granted

One complete round. Exhaustion means the claim has gone through one complete round of the state’s established appellate review process, including a petition for discretionary review in the state’s highest court when state law provides one. O’Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 845 (1999). Michigan has that structure: the Court of Appeals, then an application for leave to the Michigan Supreme Court. A claim that was raised in the Court of Appeals and left out of the Supreme Court application is at risk of never counting as exhausted. That is why I decide at the application stage which claims go up, and I do not drop one by default.

The federal ground has to be stated. A prisoner has to fairly present the claim in each appropriate state court, which alerts that court to the federal nature of the claim. Baldwin v. Reese, 541 U.S. 27, 29 (2004). Ordinarily a claim is not fairly presented if the state court has to read beyond the petition or brief, for example into a lower court opinion, to find out that it is a federal claim. 541 U.S. at 32. A petitioner who wants to say that an evidentiary ruling denied him due process has to say so in the state courts, not only later in a federal petition. Duncan v. Henry, 513 U.S. 364, 366 (1995). A claim argued only as a violation of a Michigan rule or statute may never meet that test, so my briefs name the constitutional provision for every issue that has one.

Unexhausted claims. Under Rose v. Lundy, a district court must dismiss a petition that mixes exhausted and unexhausted claims, leaving the prisoner to choose between returning to state court and presenting only the exhausted claims. 455 U.S. 509 (1982). A federal court can stay a mixed petition only in limited circumstances. Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 277 (2005). A claim is also not treated as exhausted while state law still gives the person a way to raise it (28 U.S.C. 2254(c)). Michigan allows only one motion for relief from judgment per conviction in most cases (MCR 6.502(G)(1)), so a claim left out of the first motion can be very hard to bring back. That is the reason I list every available ground before a 6.500 motion is filed.

Answers the state raises against a federal petition

These are the points the state raises against a federal petition. I look at each one while the case is still in the Michigan courts, because that is when it can still be changed.

The one-year deadline. For a petitioner who takes direct review all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, the judgment becomes final when that Court affirms on the merits or denies certiorari. For every other petitioner it becomes final when the time to seek review, in the U.S. Supreme Court or in the state court, expires. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 150 (2012). In a Michigan case, that means the date depends on how far the direct appeal went: if an application went to the Michigan Supreme Court, finality turns on the U.S. Supreme Court’s action or on the time to seek review there, and if none was filed, on the time to seek review in the state court. The Supreme Court has also treated the time for seeking certiorari as part of direct review. Jimenez v. Quarterman, 555 U.S. 113, 120 (2009).

Filings that do not pause the clock. Only a properly filed state application counts. An application is properly filed when its delivery and acceptance comply with the rules governing filings. Artuz v. Bennett, 531 U.S. 4, 8 (2000). A state petition that the state court rejects as untimely is not properly filed. Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 417 (2005). A petition to the U.S. Supreme Court for review of a state post-conviction denial does not pause it either, because the state application is no longer pending once the state courts are done. Lawrence v. Florida, 549 U.S. 327, 332 (2007). A federal habeas petition is not a state application, so it does not pause the period. Duncan v. Walker, 533 U.S. 167 (2001). I treat the 56-day limit in MCR 7.305(C)(2) and the time limits for an application after a 6.500 decision as hard dates for this reason.

Procedural default. When a state prisoner defaults a federal claim in state court under an independent and adequate state procedural rule, federal habeas review is barred unless the prisoner shows cause for the default and actual prejudice, or shows that not considering the claim would be a fundamental miscarriage of justice. Coleman v. Thompson, 501 U.S. 722, 750 (1991), abrogated on other grounds by Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1 (2012). The rule has been applied to a failure to object at trial. Wainwright v. Sykes, 433 U.S. 72, 87-88 (1977).

The Michigan version of the same idea. Under MCR 6.508(D)(3), a court may not grant relief on grounds, other than jurisdictional defects, that could have been raised on appeal or in an earlier motion unless the defendant shows both good cause and actual prejudice. Good cause can be shown by proving that appellate counsel was ineffective under the Strickland standard, or by showing that some external factor prevented counsel from raising the issue earlier. People v. Reed, 449 Mich. 375, 378 (1995). On July 28, 2026, the Michigan Supreme Court applied that rule again in People v. Langston, No. 163968 (Mich. July 28, 2026), citing Reed for the point that an external factor can establish good cause. A claim of ineffective assistance offered as cause generally has to be presented to the state courts as an independent claim first. Edwards v. Carpenter, 529 U.S. 446, 452 (2000). The Supreme Court has also described two circumstances in which a defaulted ineffective-assistance claim can be excused when a State requires that claim to be raised in a collateral proceeding. 566 U.S. at 14. Whether that applies depends on how the state’s procedure works, so I do not count on it when I plan the state-court steps.

The deferential standard. For a claim the state courts decided on the merits, a state court’s determination that a claim lacks merit precludes federal relief so long as fairminded jurists could disagree about whether it was correct. Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 101 (2011).

Why the Michigan record decides what a federal judge can see

The record is largely closed. Review of a claim the state court decided on the merits is limited to the record that was before that state court. Cullen v. Pinholster, 563 U.S. 170 (2011). If the applicant failed to develop the facts of a claim in state court, the federal statute bars an evidentiary hearing unless the applicant meets one of two narrow conditions and a clear and convincing standard. 28 U.S.C. 2254(e)(2). The practical lesson is simple: whatever has to be proved has to be put into the Michigan record.

Facts outside the transcript. A claim that depends on matters not of record, such as what trial counsel knew or why counsel did or did not act, generally requires an evidentiary hearing at the trial court level. People v. Ginther, 390 Mich. 436, 443 (1973). The claim itself has two parts: counsel’s performance was deficient, and the deficiency prejudiced the defense. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).

Counsel in post-conviction proceedings. The federal statute says that the ineffectiveness or incompetence of counsel during state or federal collateral post-conviction proceedings is not a ground for relief in a section 2254 proceeding. 28 U.S.C. 2254(i). Counsel’s mistakes in a 6.500 motion are not a ground for relief in a federal petition, so I treat the motion as the last full chance to present the claims.

Preserving issues in the Michigan courts

At trial and sentencing. An issue that was not raised in the trial court is unpreserved, and an unpreserved claim is reviewed for plain error. The defendant must show that an error occurred, that it was plain, meaning clear or obvious, and that it affected substantial rights. People v. Carines, 460 Mich. 750, 763 (1999). A failure to object is also what later feeds a procedural default argument. A challenge to the scoring of the sentencing guidelines, or to the accuracy of information relied on at sentencing, for a sentence within the guidelines range cannot be raised on appeal unless it was raised at sentencing, in a proper motion for resentencing, or in a proper motion to remand in the Court of Appeals. MCR 6.429(C).

After a plea. A defendant convicted on a plea may not raise on appeal a claim that the plea was not an understanding, voluntary or accurate one, or a claim of noncompliance with the plea rules, unless he moved in the trial court to withdraw the plea on that basis. MCR 6.310(D). In a plea case I look at that motion before I look at the application for leave.

What I do with the state-court steps

I help people with the steps that come first: the direct appeal, applications for leave to appeal, preserving issues in the record, and a motion for relief from judgment where claims remain. Those steps decide which claims were presented to the state courts.

I also explain how each state-court step affects the federal one-year period, so that you can see the full timeline before you decide anything. Fees depend on the matter, its complexity and the work the appeal requires. I explain my fee arrangement at the consultation, before you decide whether to hire me.

How I handle the Michigan state-court steps

1. Read the judgment and fix the dates. I start with the judgment of sentence, the register of actions and every order and opinion from the Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court. I work out which route the case is on, which time limits in the table above apply, and how each filing and each missed date would sit against the one-year period in 28 U.S.C. 2244(d). I calendar the earliest date any of them could be read to set until the documents show a later one.
2. Sort the issues. I read the transcripts for claims that rest on the Constitution, and for each one I note where it was raised, whether there was an objection at trial or sentencing, and whether a Michigan court has ruled on it. An unpreserved claim is reviewed only for plain error, so I decide early how each one will be presented.
3. Choose the route. A conviction at trial is appealed by claim of appeal. A conviction on a plea goes by application for leave, and a claim that the plea was not knowing, voluntary or accurate usually starts with a motion in the trial court to withdraw it. A sentence problem may call for a motion to correct an invalid sentence under MCR 6.429(B) first.
4. Build the record. If a claim depends on facts that are not in the transcript, such as what trial counsel knew or why counsel acted as he did, I look at whether a hearing should be requested in the trial court. Whatever has to be proved has to be in the Michigan record, because a federal judge reviewing a claim the state courts decided on the merits is limited to that record.
5. Brief the Court of Appeals. I state each claim with the constitutional provision it rests on, not only the Michigan rule or statute, and I cite the federal authority in the brief. The court that is asked to decide the claim has to be told what kind of claim it is.
6. Decide what goes to the Michigan Supreme Court. The application has to show one of the grounds listed in MCR 7.305(B), and in a criminal case it is due within 56 days after the Court of Appeals order or opinion. I go through each claim from the Court of Appeals and decide whether it belongs in the application, so that no claim is dropped by default.
7. File the motion for relief from judgment when the appeals are over. The motion has to list every ground available to the defendant, is verified, is limited to 50 pages with any memorandum unless the court orders more, and goes to the judge who was assigned the case at conviction. I address good cause and actual prejudice for any ground that could have been raised earlier, and I attach the affidavits and exhibits that support each ground.

Ways the Michigan state-court stage may end

Whether any of these happens depends on the record and the court. None is automatic.

Summary denial. If it plainly appears from the face of the motion, the files, the records and the transcripts that the defendant is not entitled to relief, the court denies the motion without further proceedings and states its reasons concisely. MCR 6.504(B)(2). A motion for reconsideration is due within 21 days after the clerk serves the order, and it has to say why the decision rested on a clear error. MCR 6.504(B)(3). A motion that only repeats what the court already considered will not be granted.

A decision after a response and, sometimes, a hearing. If the motion is not dismissed at the start, the court orders the prosecutor to respond. After reviewing the motion, the response and the record, the court decides whether an evidentiary hearing is required, and it states its findings of fact and conclusions of law. MCR 6.504(B)(4); MCR 6.508(B), (E).

A corrected plea. If the trial court decides there was an error in the plea proceeding that would entitle the defendant to have the plea set aside, the court gives the advice or makes the inquiries needed to fix the error, and the defendant then chooses whether to let the plea and sentence stand or to withdraw the plea. MCR 6.310(C)(3).

What I need from you

Bring the judgment of sentence and the register of actions from the trial court, and every opinion and order from the Court of Appeals and the Michigan Supreme Court, with the dates on them. Bring the trial, plea and sentencing transcripts if you have them, the briefs that were filed, and any earlier motion for relief from judgment. The approved motion form asks for the place where you are confined, the name of each lawyer who represented you and the stage at which each did, and every proceeding you started to obtain relief, including federal court proceedings, so bring whatever you filed anywhere, with the dates (MCR 6.502(C)(3), (9), (10)). Write down every claim you think was missed and why. Do not file anything yourself in a Michigan court without telling me first. A state filing that a court treats as not properly filed does not pause the federal period, and a second motion for relief from judgment is allowed only in narrow cases. Call early, because the dates in this area run from entries in the court file.

Where the Michigan steps in your Kent County case will be heard

I represent clients in Grand Rapids, Kentwood, Grandville, Wyoming and across Kent County. A motion for relief from judgment challenges a judgment entered by the circuit court (MCR 6.501), and it goes to the judge who was assigned the case when the defendant was convicted (MCR 6.504(A)). In Kent County that is the Kent County Circuit Court, the 17th Judicial Circuit. An appeal from the conviction goes to the Michigan Court of Appeals, and then an application can be made to the Michigan Supreme Court.

Why people hire me for the Michigan steps that come before a federal petition

You work directly with me, the lawyer handling your case. I tell you where the record is strong, where it is weak, what a Michigan court can and cannot do with it, and what the dates look like. I do not promise outcomes. I build the state-court case the record supports, and then we decide together how to proceed.

Fees depend on the type of case, its complexity and the stage it is in. I explain my fee arrangement at the consultation, before you decide whether to hire me.

Related Michigan pages

• Michigan appeals lawyer
• Post-conviction relief
• Criminal appeals
• Appeals after a guilty or no contest plea
• Pleas and plea deals

Reviewed by Mitchell S. Bisson, October 28, 2026.

I handle the Michigan state-court steps that come before a federal habeas petition. Contact me 24/7 by phone or email. Your Rights, My Fight! Call for a free initial consultation.

Big-Firm Power. Street-Level Grit.

Law Offices of Mitchell S. Bisson, 2828 Kraft Ave SE, Suite 295, Grand Rapids, MI 49512, serving Kent County and West Michigan.

MBisson@BissonLegal.com

This page provides general information about Michigan law and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws change and every case turns on its own facts. Consult a licensed attorney about your specific situation.