United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division
TRAVIS L. FLETCHER, Petitioner,
STATE OF FLORIDA, FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL and SECRETARY, DOC, Respondents.
OPINION AND ORDER 
POLSTER CHAPPELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
the Court is Petitioner Travis Fletcher's Petition for
Writ of Habeas Corpus under 42 U.S.C. § 2254 (Doc. 1)
filed on May 5, 2017. The Respondent Secretary of the
Department of Corrections filed her Response in Opposition
(Doc. 19) on April 4, 2018. Petitioner filed his Reply to the
Response (Doc. 23) on November 29, 2018. This matter is
briefed and ripe for the Court's review.
January 27, 2005, Petitioner was charged with a two-count
information charging him with Second Degree Murder with a
firearm or deadly weapon, Count I, and with Carjacking, Count
II. Petitioner was convicted on both Counts by a jury on
March 18, 2005. (Doc. 21-1 at 8). Petitioner moved for a new
trial on March 24, 2005, which was denied by the trial court.
On May 1, 2005, Petitioner was sentenced to two concurrent
terms of life imprisonment. (Doc. 21-1 at 18-19).
Petitioner's motion for a new trial was denied.
Petitioner then appealed his conviction and sentence. (Doc.
21-1 at 27-55). The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed
per curium. Fletcher v. State, 944 So.2d 359 (Fla.
2d DCA 2006). Mandate issued on December 22, 2006. (Doc. 21-1
March 4, 2014, Petitioner filed his state habeas petition
which was dismissed by the Post-Conviction Court on April 11,
2014. (Doc. 21-1 at 75). Petitioner filed a Rule 3.800
post-conviction motion to correct an illegal sentence. (Doc.
21-1 at 61). The Post-Conviction Court denied the motion on
June 3, 2014. (Doc. 21-1 at 70). Petitioner appealed and the
Second District Court of Appeal affirmed per curium.
Fletcher v. State, 163 So.3d 1192 (Fla. 2d DCA
2014). Mandate issued on October 27, 2014. (Doc. 21 at Ex.
filed a Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief on
February 11, 2016. Petitioner argued that his life sentence
without parole was illegal since he was a juvenile when he
was sentenced. (Doic. 21-1 at 180). The Post-Conviction Court
denied Petitioner's motion and the Second District Court
of Appeal affirmed per curium. (Doc. 21-1 at Ex. 24). The
Florida Supreme Court dismissed the case for lack of
jurisdiction. (Doc. 21-1 at Ex. 26).
now brings this Petition asserting three grounds. Respondent
asserts the Petition was untimely filed.
Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”)
AEDPA, the standard of review is greatly circumscribed and
highly deferential to the state courts. Alston v. Fla.
Dep't of Corr., 610 F.3d 1318, 1325 (11th Cir. 2010)
(citations omitted). AEDPA altered the federal court's
role in reviewing state prisoner applications in order to
“prevent federal habeas ‘retrials' and to
ensure that state-court convictions are given effect to the
extent possible under law.” Bell v. Cone, 535
U.S. 685, 693 (2002). These legal principles apply to this
federal court must afford a high level of deference to the
state court's decision. Ferguson v. Culliver,
527 F.3d 1144, 1146 (11th Cir. 2008). Habeas relief may not
be granted with respect to a claim adjudicated on the merits
in state court unless the adjudication of the claim:
(1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved
an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal
law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States;
(2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable
determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented
in the State court proceeding.
28 U.S.C. § 2254(d); Cullen v. Pinholster, 563
U.S. 170, 181(2011). “This is a difficult to meet, and
highly deferential standard for evaluating state-court
rulings, which demands that the state-court decisions be
given the benefit of the doubt.” Id. (internal
quotations and citations omitted). See also Harrington v.
Richter, 562 U.S. 86, 102 (2011) (pointing out that