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.

Smith v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

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

July 17, 2018

ANTOINE SMITH, Petitioner,
v.
SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et. al., Respondents.

          ORDER

          TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         I. Status

         Petitioner Antoine Smith, an inmate of the Florida penal system, initiated this action by filing a pro se Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (Doc. 1) on November 4, 2015.[1] In conformance with the Court's Order (Doc. 5), Smith filed a pro se Amended Petition on November 19, 2015.[2] See Doc. 7. Smith challenges two 2007 state court (Duval County, Florida) convictions for second degree murder and attempted second degree murder for which he is currently serving a thirty-four-year term of incarceration and a concurrent thirty-year term of incarceration, respectively. Doc. 7 at 1.

         Smith raises the following two grounds for relief: (1) his pleas of guilty were involuntary because the circuit court failed to inform him during the plea colloquy that reclassification of his convictions under section 775.087(1), Florida Statutes, was mandatory; and (2) counsel misadvised him about the availability of self-defense as a viable affirmative defense. See Doc. 7. Respondents assert the Petition is untimely filed and request dismissal of this case with prejudice. See Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 29) (Resp.).[3] Smith filed a Reply. See Petitioner's Reply (Doc. 32). This case is ripe for review.[4]

         II. One-Year Limitations Period

         The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) amended 28 U.S.C. § 2244 by adding the following subsection:

(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).

         III. ...


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.