Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Steven G. Williams v. Randy Grounds

November 10, 2011

STEVEN G. WILLIAMS PETITIONER,
v.
RANDY GROUNDS, RESPONDENT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

I. Introduction

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This case is before the undersigned pursuant to both parties' consent. Docs. 4, 8. Pending before the court is respondent's June 24, 2011, motion to dismiss on the grounds that this action is barred by the statute of limitations. Doc. 9. Petitioner filed an opposition on August 15, 2011, and respondent filed a reply. Docs. 13, 18. For the reasons that follow, the motion to dismiss is granted and this case is dismissed.

II. Motion to Dismiss

The statute of limitations for federal habeas corpus petitions is set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1):

A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court. The limitation period shall run from the latest of--

(A) the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review;

(B) the date on which the impediment to filing an application created by State action in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the applicant was prevented from filing by such State action;

(C) the date on which the constitutional right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if the right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review; or

(D) the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence.

Petitioner was convicted of possession of marijuana in prison and sentenced to a determinate state prison term of four years on September 19, 2007. Lodged Document (Lod. Doc.) 1. On March 30, 2009, the California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, affirmed the judgment. Lod. Doc. 2. On June 10, 2009, the California Supreme Court denied review. Lod. Doc. 4. Petitioner's conviction became final 90 days later, on September 8, 2009, when the time to file a petition for writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court expired. Bowen v. Roe, 188 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 1999). Time began to run the next day, on September 9, 2009. Patterson v. Stewart, 251 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2001). Petitioner had one year, that is, until September 8, 2010, to file a timely federal petition, absent applicable tolling. The instant action, filed March 29, 2011,*fn1 is not timely unless petitioner is entitled to statutory or equitable tolling.

Petitioner filed three state post-conviction collateral actions:

1. July 13, 2010: First habeas petition filed in Sacramento County Superior Court. Lod. Doc. 5. The petition was denied on August 4, 2010. Lod. Doc. 6

2. August 11, 2010: Second habeas petition filed in California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District. Lod. Doc. 7. The petition was denied on August 19, 2010, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.