From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. Washington

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jun 13, 2019
CASE NO. 18-cv-13338 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 13, 2019)

Opinion

CASE NO. 18-cv-13338

06-13-2019

RODNEY JURON JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. HEIDI WASHINGTON, Respondent.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION (Doc. 20) AND MOTION FOR ORAL ARGUMENT (Doc. 21)

I.

This is a habeas case under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. In 2014, Rodney Juron Johnson ("Petitioner") pleaded guilty to delivery/manufacture of 50 to 449 grams of cocaine and possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony in state court. In 2018, Petitioner, proceeding pro se, filed a habeas petition raising claims concerning the effectiveness of counsel, the validity of a search and seizure, the conduct of the prosecutor, the state court's jurisdiction, and his confrontation rights relative to an informant. The Court dismissed the petition as untimely. (Doc. 18).

Before the Court is Petitioner's "response" to the Court's dismissal order, which the Court construes as a request for reconsideration, as well as Petitioner's motion for oral argument. For the reasons that follow, the motions will be denied.

II.

A motion for reconsideration which presents issues already ruled upon by the court, either expressly or by reasonable implication, will not be granted. Hence v. Smith, 49 F. Supp. 2d 547, 550 (E.D. Mich. 1999); Czajkowski v. Tindall & Assoc., P.C., 967 F. Supp. 951, 952 (E.D. Mich. 1997). The Court properly dismissed the habeas petition as untimely.. Contrary to Petitioner's assertion, the Court did not miscalculate or misapply the one-year period. Petitioner fails to meet his burden of showing a palpable defect by which the Court has been misled or his burden of showing that a different disposition must result from a correction thereof, as required by Local Rule 7.1(g)(3). Accordingly, Petitioner's motion for reconsideration is DENIED.

Given this determination, petitioner's motion for oral argument is also DENIED. This case remains closed. No further pleadings should be filed in this matter.

SO ORDERED.

S/Avern Cohn

AVERN COHN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: 6/13/2019

Detroit, Michigan


Summaries of

Johnson v. Washington

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jun 13, 2019
CASE NO. 18-cv-13338 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 13, 2019)
Case details for

Johnson v. Washington

Case Details

Full title:RODNEY JURON JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. HEIDI WASHINGTON, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Jun 13, 2019

Citations

CASE NO. 18-cv-13338 (E.D. Mich. Jun. 13, 2019)