Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Valladares Miranda v. Madsen

United States District Court, D. Nebraska

October 22, 2018

HECTOR A. VALLADARES MIRANDA, Petitioner,
v.
ROBERT MADSEN, Warden of Nebraska State Penitentiary; and SCOTT FRAKES, Director of Department of Corrections; Respondents.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          Richard G. Kopf Senior United States District Judge.

         This matter is before the court on Respondents' Motion for Summary Judgment. (Filing No. 8.) Respondents argue that Petitioner Hector A. Valladares Miranda's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing No. 1) must be dismissed because it is barred by the limitations period set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). The court agrees and will dismiss the petition with prejudice.

         I. BACKGROUND

         A. Conviction and Direct Appeal

         Pursuant to a plea agreement, Miranda pleaded no contest to first degree sexual assault. (Filing No. 9-2 at CM/ECF pp. 2-3.)[1] The state district court sentenced Miranda to 35 to 45 years' imprisonment with credit for 368 days served. (Id. at CM/ECF p. 3.) On February 18, 2015, the Nebraska Court of Appeals summarily affirmed Miranda's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. (Filing No. 9-1 at CM/ECF p. 2.) Miranda did not petition the Nebraska Supreme Court for further review. (Id.) The mandate was issued on March 26, 2015. (Id.)

         B. Postconviction Motion

         On February 18, 2016, Miranda filed a pro se verified motion for postconviction relief in the state district court. (Filing No. 9-3 at CM/ECF pp. 1-6.) On April 8, 2016, Miranda filed a verified amended motion for postconviction relief. (Id. at CM/ECF pp. 7-18.) On September 9, 2016, the state district court denied Miranda postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. (Id. at CM/ECF pp. 19-23.)

         Miranda appealed the denial of postconviction relief to Nebraska's appellate courts. On October 6, 2017, the Nebraska Court of Appeals affirmed the state district court's denial of postconviction relief. (Filing No. 9-1 at CM/ECF p. 4; Filing No. 9-2.) The Nebraska Supreme Court denied Miranda's petition for further review on December 11, 2017, and issued its mandate on December 27, 2017. (Filing No. 9-1 at CM/ECF p. 5.)

         C. Habeas Petition

         Miranda filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in this court on February 16, 2018. (Filing No. 1.) Thereafter, Respondents moved for summary judgment (Filing No. 8; Filing No. 10), arguing the habeas petition is barred by the statute of limitations. Miranda did not file a brief in opposition to Respondents' motion. This matter is fully submitted for disposition.

         II. ANALYSIS

         A. One-Year Limitations Period

         The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”), 110 Stat. 1214, establishes a one-year limitations period for state prisoners to file for federal habeas relief that runs from the latest of four specified dates. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). This case concerns only the first date listed in § 2244(d)(1): “the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A). “The statute of limitations is tolled while state post-conviction or other collateral review is pending.” King v. Hobbs, 666 F.3d 1132, 1135 (8th Cir. 2012) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2)).

         Here, Miranda's conviction became final on March 20, 2015, the date on which Miranda's time for pursuing review in the Nebraska Supreme Court expired. See Gonzalez v. Thaler,565 U.S. 134, 137, 150 (2012) (holding that, for a state prisoner who does not seek review in a State's highest court, the judgment becomes “final” for purposes of § 2244(d)(1)(A) on the date that the time for seeking such review expires); see alsoNeb. Rev. Stat. § 24-1107 (thirty days to petition for further review from when the Court of Appeals issues its decision); Neb. Ct. R. App. P. ยง 2-102(F)(1) (stating that a petition for further review and memorandum brief in ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.