Patrick v. McDonough

3 Citing cases

  1. Cross v. McDonough

    Case No. 4:06cv460-RH/WCS (N.D. Fla. Mar. 7, 2008)

    Clay v. United States, 537 U.S. 522, 123 S.Ct. 1072, 1075, 155 L.Ed.2d 88 (2003). The one year AEDPA period for filing a ยง 2254 petition in this court commenced the next day, on October 26, 2004.Bronaugh v. Ohio, 235 F.3d 280, 285 (6th Cir. 2000) (applying FED.R.CIV.P. 6(a));Patrick v. McDonough, 2007 WL 3231740, *1, No. 4:06cv543-SPM/WCS, (N.D. Fla. Oct 29, 2007) (citing Bronaugh).

  2. Osgood v. Sec'y

    Case No. 3:13-cv-794-J-39JBT (M.D. Fla. Jan. 13, 2016)

    In this instance, the petition for belated appeal was filed before the limitations period expired, the state appellate court granted the motion, and the reexamination of the merits commenced. See Patrick v. McDonough, No. 4:06cv543-SPM/WCS, 2007 WL 3231740, at *9 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 29, 2007) (recognizing that if a motion for a belated appeal is filed when a petitioner still has time left on his one-year clock, it is a properly filed application pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(2) and tolls the limitations period while it is pending). Therefore, the Petition, filed on Monday, July 1, 2013, is due to be dismissed as untimely unless Petitioner can avail himself of one of the statutory provisions which extends or tolls the limitations period.

  3. Danny v. Sec'y, DOC

    Case No. 3:13-cv-712-J-39PDB (M.D. Fla. Oct. 22, 2014)

    The Court recognizes that the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida has taken the opposite position, finding that a petition for belated appeal tolled the limitations period even though the petition for belated appeal was ultimately denied. Patrick v. McDonough, No. 4:06cv543-SPM/WCS, 2007 WL 3231740, at *9-11 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 29, 2007) (adopting magistrate judge's report and recommendation). The Eleventh Circuit has not addressed this particular question.