United States District Court, N.D. Mississippi, Oxford Division
B. BIGGERS SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
matter comes before the court on the pro se petition
of Billy Dale Hill for a writ of habeas corpus under
28 U.S.C. § 2254. The State has moved to dismiss the
petition as successive and untimely filed. Hill has not
responded to the motion, and the deadline to do so has
expired; the matter is ripe for resolution. For the reasons
set forth below, the motion by the State to dismiss will be
granted, and the instant petition for a writ of habeas
corpus will be dismissed as both successive and untimely
and Procedural Posture
Dale Hill was convicted of the rape and capital murder of an
eighty-seven (87) year old victim in the Circuit Court of
Coahoma County, Mississippi, and was originally sentenced to
death. Hill v. State, 339 So.2d 1382 (Miss. 1976).
However, on appeal, the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed
and remanded. Id. On remand, Hill pled guilty to
both the murder and rape, and the trial court sentenced him
to a term of life on each charge. Hill v. State, 388
So.2d 143 (Miss. 1980).
October 15, 1980, Hill filed his first habeas corpus
petition in this court in Cause No. WC 80-144-LS-O. In that
petition, Hill alleged the following grounds for relief (as
summarized by the court):
Ground One: Ineffective assistance of
counsel for failure to adequately inform Hill of parole
eligibility and pressuring him to plead guilty.
Ground Two: The trial court failed to honor
the plea agreement, which was for two (2) consecutive life
sentences rather than two (2) life sentences without the
possibility of parole.
Ground Three: Petitioner was misinformed
about the number of years he must serve before becoming
February 5, 1982, the Magistrate Judge recommended that
habeas corpus relief be denied.
February 22, 1982, the District Judge approved and adopted
the Magistrate Judge's recommendations and dismissed
Hill's petition without evidentiary hearing. Hill then
filed a second petition for a writ of habeas corpus
in the Southern District of Mississippi, Cause No.
J90-0157(W), in which he raised the following grounds for
relief (as stated by the petitioner):
Ground One: The minutes of the court by
which the grand jury was supposedly elected, empaneled and
sworn, was not signed by the presiding judge.
Ground Two: The court absent the grand jury
being duly sworn, empaneled, lacked jurisdiction to try the
Ground Three: Counsel was constitutionally
ineffective for not filing a motion to quash the indictment,
and for failing to spot this defect.
April 10, 1991, the petition was transferred to this Court.
On April 30, 1991, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the
petition be denied, finding that Hill's second petition
was successive - and also denied the petition on the merits.
On May 15, 1991, the District Judge approved ...