Randall v. Clark, No. 1:2017cv00604 - Document 7 (E.D. Va. 2017)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER- it is hereby ORDERED that this petition be and is DISMISSED, WITH PREJUDICE as barred by the statute of limitations. THIS COURT EXPRESSLY DECLINES TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY . Signed by District Judge James C. Cacheris on 7/18/2017. (see Order for further details)(dest, ) (copy sent as directed in the Order)

Download PDF
Randall v. Clark Doc. 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division Maurice Terrell Randall, Petitioner, v. ) ) ) ) Harold W. Clarke, Respondent. ) ) l:17cv604(JCC/MSN) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Maurice Terrell Randall, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012), challenging the lawfulness of his conviction in the Williamsburg/James City County Circuit Court. By Order dated June 6, 2017, petitioner was advised that his petition was untimely and was directed to show cause why the petition should not be dismissed as barred by the statute of limitations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Petitioner responded to that Order on June 29, 2017. For the following reasons, petitioner's response fails to comply with the June 6,2017 Order, and this civil action will be dismissed, with prejudice, as barred by the statute of limitations. I. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus must be dismissed if filed later than one year after (1) thejudgment becomes final; (2) any state-created impediment to filing a habeas petition is removed; (3) the United States Supreme Court newly recognizes the constitutional right asserted; or (4) the factual predicate of the claim could have been discovered with due diligence. Id. § 2244(d)(l)(A)-(D). In calculating the one-year period, a court must exclude the time during which petitioner's state collateral proceedings were pending. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2). Notably, a federal habeas petition filed after or during the pendency of a direct appeal will not Dockets.Justia.com

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.