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.

Roberts v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division

April 18, 2018

ALLEN ROBERTS, JR., Petitioner,
v.
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Respondents.

          ORDER

          MARCIA MORALES HOWARD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         I. Status

         Petitioner Allen Roberts, Jr., an inmate of the Florida penal system, initiated this action on May 26, 2015, [1] by filing a pro se Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. He filed an Amended Petition (Doc. 29) on December 6, 2016. In the Amended Petition, Roberts challenges a 2011 state court (Duval County, Florida) judgment of conviction for sale or delivery of cocaine. Respondents have submitted a memorandum in opposition to the Petition. See Respondents' Motion to Dismiss the Amended Petition (Response; Doc. 30) with exhibits (Resp. Ex.). On November 2, 2015, the Court entered an Order to Show Cause and Notice to Petitioner (Doc. 10), admonishing Roberts regarding his obligations and giving Roberts a time frame in which to submit a reply. On January 18, 2017, Roberts replied. See Petitioner's Reply to Motion to Dismiss (Reply; Doc. 31). This case is ripe for review.

         II. One-Year Limitations Period

         The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) imposes a one-year statute of limitations on petitions for writ of habeas corpus. Specifically, 28 U.S.C. § 2244 provides:

(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.
(2) The time during which a properly filed application for State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect to the pertinent judgment or claim is pending shall not be counted toward any period of limitation under this subsection.

28 U.S.C. § 2244(d).

         Respondents contend that Roberts has not complied with the one-year period of limitations set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). The following procedural history is relevant to the one-year limitations issue. On September 17, 2009, the State of Florida charged Roberts in No. 16-2009-CF-011820 with three counts of sale or delivery of cocaine. See Resp. Ex. GGG, docket entries 13-15. Roberts proceeded to a jury trial in June 2011, at the conclusion of which, on June 8, 2011, the jury found him guilty of three counts of sale or delivery of cocaine. See id., docket entries 240-42. On August 2, 2011, the court sentenced Roberts to a term of imprisonment of thirty years on each count, to run concurrently with each other. See Resp. Ex. A, Judgment. On October 7, 2011, the appellate court dismissed Roberts' appeal because he failed to comply with its order requiring him to either pay the filing fee or submit the trial court's order of insolvency. See Resp. Ex. C; see http://jweb.flcourts.org/pls/ds/dsdocket, Roberts v. Florida, No. 1D11-4328. The court later denied his motion for reinstatement, see Resp. Exs. D; E, as well as his motion for reconsideration on January 12, 2012, see Resp. Exs. F; G.[2]

         Roberts' conviction became final on Monday, February 13, 2012 (30 days from January 12, 2012). Because Roberts' conviction was after April 24, 1996, the effective date of the AEDPA, Roberts had one year from the date his conviction became final to file the federal petition. His Petition, filed on May 26, 2015, is due to be dismissed as untimely ...


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.