§ 2244(d)(1)(A) includes the period within which a petitioner can file a petition for a writ of certiorari from the United States Supreme Court, whether or not the petitioner actually files such a petition.'). Brambles's conviction became final on December 1, 1998, ninety-days after the California Supreme Court denied his petition for direct review. The AEDPA requires state prisoners to seek federal habeas corpus relief within one-year after their convictions become final. Nor did the court inform him that he had a third option: he could dismiss the unexhausted claims, move to stay proceedings in federal court on his exhausted claim and, if that motion were granted, exhaust the dismissed claims in state court then return to federal court and move to amend his petition to include all exhausted claims (the 'stay and abey' process).

But the district court did not explain that to him. 1 Thus, if Brambles dismissed his petition, his right to seek federal habeas review would be lost unless he could establish equitable tolling. § 2244 limits the time period within which a petition may be filed.' In fact, the one-year period within which to file a federal petition had already expired by the time the district court made this ruling. The district court told Brambles he could either dismiss the unexhausted claims or dismiss the whole petition 'without prejudice to any right may have to file a new petition once available state remedies are exhausted as to all claims.' The court also warned Brambles, who was then pro se, that 'recently amended 28 U.S.C. Brambles filed an earlier petition that was timely, but it included one exhausted and two unexhausted claims.

Brambles intisar khanani