Alcala to put on Dr. Ray London, who would have testified that Crappa’s knowledge of the murder may have been the product of suggestive interview techniques. After his second conviction and death sentence, Alcala unsuccessfully pursued direct appeals and state post-conviction remedies. In 1994, Alcala sought federal habeas corpus relief. The district court conducted an evidentiary hearing on his claims, and in 2001 conditionally granted his petition, issuing a writ ordering California to release him or grant him a new trial. Standard of Review Because Alcala filed his federal ha-beas petition in 1994, the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) does not apply to his petition. See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. 320, 327, 336, 117 S.Ct. 2059, 138 L.Ed.2d 481 (1997) (<HOLDING>). We review de novo the district court’s
holding that in general aedpa applies only to habeas petitions filed after the statutes effective date of april 24 1996 and noting that aedpas special procedures for 28 usc  2254 petitions in capital cases apply also to petitions pending on april 24 1996 holding that prisoners whose convictions became final on or before april 24 1996 must file their  2255 motions before april 24 1997 holding that habeas petitions challenging judgments of conviction that became final before the effective date of the aedpa are not time barred if filed within one year from aedpas effective date april 241996 holding that the aedpa applies to those habeas corpus petitions filed after its effective date of april 24 1996 holding that prisoners had one year from the effective date of aedpa april 24 1996 to file their habeas petitions before they could be considered timebarred by the operation of  2244d1