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.

Villanueva v. Filson

United States District Court, D. Nevada

January 18, 2017

MAYNOR VILLANUEVA, Petitioner,
v.
TIMOTHY FILSON, et al., Respondents.

          ORDER

          RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This case is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, by Maynor Villanueva. Villanueva filed his habeas petition (ECF No. 1) on September 12, 2016.

         The court has examined the petition, pursuant to Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts. Villanueva's habeas petition appears defective, in that it appears to have been filed long after the expiration of the applicable one-year statute of limitations. The court will, therefore, order Villanueva to show cause why the court should not dismiss this action.

         Villanueva's habeas petition challenges his conviction and sentence for attempted murder. See Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (ECF No. 1), pp. 1-2. According to the petition, the judgment of conviction was entered on June 7, 2000, in Nevada's Eighth Judicial District Court. See id. at 1-2, 5.

         Villanueva alleges in his petition that he appealed from his conviction, and the Nevada Supreme Court affirmed on July 25, 2001. See id. Villanueva states that he did not file a state habeas corpus action. See id. at 1. Indeed, his petition does not describe any state court litigation regarding his conviction between July 25, 2001, and July 22, 2014, when he filed, in the state district court, a motion for modification of his sentence. See id. at 1-2, 5. According to Villanueva, the district court denied his motion for modification of sentence, he appealed from that ruling, and the Nevada Court of Appeals affirmed on February 24, 2015, and denied rehearing on June 9, 2015. See id. at 5.

         The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), enacted in 1996, included a one-year statute of limitations for federal habeas petitions filed by prisoners challenging state convictions or sentences:

         (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;
© 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.

28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1).

         Villanueva's direct appeal concluded on July 25, 2001, when the Nevada Supreme Court affirmed his judgment of conviction. See Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, pp. 1-2, 5. Adding the ninety days within which a petition for a writ of certiorari could have been filed (see Supreme Court Rule 13), the date on which Villanueva's conviction became final, for purposes of the AEDPA statute of limitations, was October 23, 2001. The AEDPA limitations period began running on that date. And, absent any tolling, the one-year limitations period expired a year later, on October 23, 2002, more than thirteen years before Villanueva initiated this action.

         The AEDPA statute of limitations is tolled during the time that a properly filed application for state post-conviction or other collateral review is pending in state court. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2). However, there is no indication in Villanueva's habeas petition that he initiated any state court litigation with respect to his conviction and sentence between October 23, 2001, and October 23, 2002. In fact, according to his petition, Villanueva did not further challenge his conviction and sentence in any court until July ...


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.