From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zinser v. Dep't of Corr. Mci-Norfolk

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Dec 29, 2014
Civil Case No. 13-13194-RGS (D. Mass. Dec. 29, 2014)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 13-13194-RGS

12-29-2014

LAWRENCE ZINSER v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS MCI-NORFOLK, GARY RODEN, SUPERINTENDENT


ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

I agree with Magistrate Judge Boal that Lawrence Zinser's petition is time-barred and that there is no basis for invocation of the doctrine of equitable tolling. Zinser makes no showing of the extraordinary circumstances necessary to toll the limitations period under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). His appellate counsel did an admirable job in his representation and there is no evidence of a mental disability on Zinser's part to justify his late filing. Therefore, Judge Boal's Recommendation is ADOPTED and the petition is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk will enter judgment for the Respondent and close the case.

AEDPA provides for a one-year period of limitations during which "a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court" may apply for federal habeas relief. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Absent tolling, the limitations period begins to run from "the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review." Id. at § 2244(d)(1)(A).

SO ORDERED.

/s/ Richard G. Stearns

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Zinser v. Dep't of Corr. Mci-Norfolk

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
Dec 29, 2014
Civil Case No. 13-13194-RGS (D. Mass. Dec. 29, 2014)
Case details for

Zinser v. Dep't of Corr. Mci-Norfolk

Case Details

Full title:LAWRENCE ZINSER v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS MCI-NORFOLK, GARY RODEN…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Date published: Dec 29, 2014

Citations

Civil Case No. 13-13194-RGS (D. Mass. Dec. 29, 2014)

Citing Cases

Cruz v. United States

After such requests were denied by the sentencing court, D. 126 ¶ 22; D. 126-20, Cruz sought reconsideration…