Opinion
Case No.: 2:19-cv-01113-JAD-NJK
10-28-2019
JOSEPH NAPOLEON WARREN III, Petitioner v. HOWELL, et al., Respondents
Order Dismissing Case and Denying Motion for Appointment of Counsel
[ECF Nos. 1, 3, 7]
Petitioner Joseph Napoleon Warren, III petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. I issued an order to show cause as to whether the petition should be dismissed as time-barred under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act's (AEDPA) one-year statute of limitations. In the show-cause order, I noted that it appeared from the state-court record that AEDPA's deadline for Warren to file a federal habeas petition had expired nearly twenty-six years before Warren filed this petition. Because Warren has failed to demonstrate that his petition was filed within the limitations period or that he is entitled to equitable tolling of the AEDPA deadline, I dismiss his petition.
ECF No. 1-1.
ECF No. 6.
Id.
Discussion
Warren responds to the show-cause order by contending that he is entitled to equitable tolling of the one-year limitations period on the basis of the "magnitude of the constitutional violations" in his case. He asserts that the guilt and penalty phases of his trial should have been bifurcated and that the prosecutor committed misconduct. He also includes as exhibits the jury instructions from the trial against him, excerpts from the trial transcript, the jury verdict, and the case summary. But Warren does not attempt to explain how he diligently pursued his rights or how some extraordinary circumstance stood in his way during these intervening decades. His response is silent as to why he did not pursue federal habeas relief earlier.
ECF No. 7 at 2.
Id. at 3.
Id. at 6-29.
See Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 418 (2005); Calderon v. U.S. Dist. Court (Beeler), 128 F.3d 1283, 1288 (9th Cir. 1997), overruled in part on other grounds, Calderon v. U.S. Dist. Court (Kelly), 163 F.3d 530 (9th Cir. 1998).
See ECF No. 7. --------
I find that Warren has failed to demonstrate a sufficient basis for equitable tolling or to otherwise excuse the delay. Because Warren's federal habeas petition was untimely filed, and because Warren has not shown that he is entitled to statutory or equitable tolling, I dismiss Warren's petition as untimely.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the petition (ECF No. 1-1) is DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED because jurists of reason would not find the court's dismissal of this decades-late petition to be debatable or incorrect.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel (ECF No. 3) is DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to DETACH AND FILE THE PETITION (ECF No. 1-1), ENTER JUDGMENT accordingly, and CLOSE THIS CASE.
/s/_________
U.S. District Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey
October 28, 2019