In Gonzalez v. Thaler [transcript, PDF; JURIST report], the court considered when jurisdiction exists pursuant to a certificate of appealability issued under 28 USC § 2253(c) [text] to adjudicate a petitioner's appeal and when time runs out for habeas corpus review under 28 USC § 2244(d)(1) [text]. Petitioner argued that a certificate of appealability (COA) that does not fully comply with all the requirements of the statute, nonetheless confers jurisdiction on the federal appeals court. Petitioner also argued that the one-year statute of limitations for federal habeas corpus review should not begin until the ruling is final according to State law, as opposed to a uniform federally-imposed definition of a final ruling. The state argued that, because the COA was incomplete due to the district court judge's error, it did not meet the requirements of the statute and, therefore, did not confer jurisdiction on the appeals court. The state also argued that the statute provides a two-prong to determine with the clock starts to run and that, even where that might start the clock running before state habeas corpus review becomes available, the clock should start nonetheless. The state noted the circumstances of this care occur only rarely and, in any event, the stay-and-abeyance procedure used in Rhines would resolve the issue, and should have been employed in this case.