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.

Boyd v. Williams

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

November 21, 2019

EVERETT BOYD, PETITIONER
v.
JESSIE WILLIAMS, and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, RESPONDENTS

          OPINION AND ORDER

          MICHAEL P. MILLS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This matter comes before the Court on the pro se petition of Everett Boyd for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Respondents have moved to dismiss the petition as time-barred. The petitioner has responded to the motion, and the matter is ripe for resolution. For the reasons set forth below, Respondents' motion will be granted, and the instant petition will be dismissed as untimely filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d).

         Factual and Procedural Background

         Petitioner Everett Boyd is currently in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and housed at the Marshall County Correctional Facility located in Holly Springs, Mississippi. On February 25, 2006, Boyd was convicted of the crimes of murder while engaged in the crime of drive-by shooting and of shooting into an occupied dwelling in the Circuit Court of Holmes County, Mississippi. Doc. #8-1. Subsequently, on March 21, 2006, Boyd was sentenced to a term of life on the murder conviction and a term of ten (10) years on the conviction of shooting into an occupied dwelling, the sentences to be served concurrently. Id. Boyd's convictions and sentences were affirmed by the Mississippi Supreme Court on March 20, 2008. See Doc. #8-2; Boyd v. State, 977 So.2d 329 (Miss. 2008). Boyd did not seek certiorari review with the United States Supreme Court.

         On April 1, 2011, Boyd signed an “Application for Leave to File for Post-Conviction Collateral Relief in the Circuit Court of Holmes County, Mississippi, ” which was stamped as “filed” in the Mississippi Supreme Court on April 5, 2011. Doc. #9-8. That application was denied by Order of the Mississippi Supreme Court on June 2, 2011. Doc. #8-3. In its Order, the Mississippi Supreme Court found that Boyd had failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a state or federal right, and further that his claim for ineffective assistance of counsel failed to meet the Strickland standard. Id.

         More than a year later, on June 19, 2012, Boyd submitted an “Application for Leave to File Petition for Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Pursuant to 99-39-27(9), ” which was stamped as “filed” in the Mississippi Supreme Court on June 22, 2012. Doc. #9-8. The Mississippi Supreme Court denied Boyd's application on July 26, 2012. Doc. #8-4. In its Order, the Mississippi Supreme Court found that Boyd's application was procedurally barred as both untimely and successive. Id.

         Some six years later, on December 8, 2018, Boyd signed a “Motion for Leave to Proceed in the Trial Court, ” which was stamped as “filed” in the Mississippi Supreme Court on December 10, 2018. Doc. #9-9. Boyd's motion was denied by Order of the Mississippi Supreme Court on February 1, 2019. Doc. #8-5. Within the Order, the Mississippi Supreme Court found that the motion was untimely, successive, and without merit. Id. Thereafter, Boyd sought rehearing of the Court's decision, but that motion was denied by Order filed on March 1, 2019. Doc. #8-6. Boyd additionally filed a “Petition for Writ of Certiorari” which was denied by the Mississippi Supreme Court on March 22, 2019. Doc. #8-7.

         Boyd filed the instant petition for federal habeas corpus relief on June 24, 2019.[1] Doc. #1. On September 18, 2019, the court entered an order directing the respondents to answer Boyd's petition on or before November 27, 2019. Doc. #5. On October 8, 2019, the State moved to dismiss Smith's petition as untimely. Doc. #8. Boyd filed his response in opposition on November 12, 2019.[2] Doc. #13.

         Legal Standard

         The instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus is governed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”). Egerton v. Cockrell, 334 F.3d 433, 436 (5th Cir. 2003). The issue of whether Respondents' motion to dismiss should be granted turns on the statute's limitation period, which provides:

(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 ...

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.