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.

Solomon v. State

United States District Court, N.D. Mississippi, Aberdeen Division

December 18, 2017

DANNY A. SOLOMON PETITIONER
v.
THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI and ATTORNEY GENERAL JIM HOOD RESPONDENTS

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          SHARION AYCOCK U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This matter comes before the Court on the pro se petition of inmate Danny Solomon for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondents have moved to dismiss the petition as time-barred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244, and Solomon has filed a response in opposition to the motion. For the reasons set forth below, Respondents' motion will be granted, and the instant petition will be dismissed with prejudice.

         Factual and Procedural History

         Danny Solomon pleaded guilty to the crimes of sexual battery and burglary in Oktibbeha County Circuit Court Case No. 2009-0157-CR. Doc. #11-1 at 5-6, 8-11. On April 19, 2011, the circuit court sentenced Solomon to consecutive terms of seven years' imprisonment for the burglary conviction and twenty years' imprisonment for the sexual-battery conviction, with ten years suspended.[1] Id.

         On or about March 5, 2013, Solomon submitted a “Petitio[n] for a Sentence Reduction” in Oktibbeha County Circuit Court Case No. 2013-0121-CVK. Doc. #11-3. The motion was dismissed on May 1, 2013. Id. at 4. According to the dockets of the circuit court, Solomon did not appeal this decision. Docs. #11-1 and #11-2.

         Thereafter, Solomon submitted a “Motion for Post-Conviction Collateral Relief” in Oktibbeha County Circuit Court Case No. 2013-0121-CVK that was signed on June 29, 2017 and stamped filed on July 5, 2017. Doc. #11-4. The circuit court dismissed the motion on July 25, 2017. Id. at 8. According to the dockets of the circuit court, Solomon did not appeal this decision. Docs. #11-1 and #11-2.[2]

         Solomon filed the instant petition on or about August 18, 2017. Although he failed identify the contested judgment(s) in his petition, the Court construed his petition as challenging his sexual battery conviction because of the nature of Solomon's allegations. See Docs. #1 and #6.

         Legal Standard

         The instant petition for writ of habeas corpus is subject to the statute of limitations of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (''AAEDPA''). Egerton v. Cockrell, 334 F.3d 433, 436 (5th Cir. 2003). The issue of whether Respondents' motion should be granted turns on the statute's limitation period, which provides:

(d)(1) A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court. The limitation period shall run from the latest of -
(A) the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review;
(B) the date on which the impediment to filing an application created by State action in violation of the Constitution or the laws of the United States is removed, if the applicant was prevented from filing by such State action;
(C) the date on which the constitutional right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if the right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review; or
(D) the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the ...

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.