From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Young v. Hobbs

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Jun 4, 2010
Case No. 5:09-CV-00378-SWW/JTK (E.D. Ark. Jun. 4, 2010)

Opinion

Case No. 5:09-CV-00378-SWW/JTK.

June 4, 2010


ORDER


Petitioner is hereby informed of his opportunity to reply within thirty (30) days to Respondent's arguments in his Response (DE #5) that the petition should be dismissed because it is untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1), and Petitioner has not shown he is entitled to statutory tolling of the limitations period under § 2244(d)(2). Petitioner may also reply to Respondent's argument that the petition should be dismissed as procedurally barred because Petitioner failed to properly appeal the denial of his state post-conviction petition under Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1. Petitioner may reply to any other argument in the Response.

SO ORDERED


Summaries of

Young v. Hobbs

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Jun 4, 2010
Case No. 5:09-CV-00378-SWW/JTK (E.D. Ark. Jun. 4, 2010)
Case details for

Young v. Hobbs

Case Details

Full title:MARCUS D. YOUNG PETITIONER v. RAY HOBBS , Interim Director Arkansas…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division

Date published: Jun 4, 2010

Citations

Case No. 5:09-CV-00378-SWW/JTK (E.D. Ark. Jun. 4, 2010)