Gondee Charles Singletary v. Mike Martel
Filing
7
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PETITION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED by Magistrate Judge Patrick J. Walsh. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 3/9/2018. (See document for further details.) (sbou)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
GONDEE CHARLES SINGLETARY,
11
Petitioner,
12
v.
13
MIKE MARTEL, WARDEN,
14
Respondent.
15
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. ED CV 18-157-DMG (PJW)
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PETITION
SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED
On January 5, 2018, Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of
17
Habeas Corpus in the district court for the Eastern District of
18
California, challenging his convictions in December 1995 for second
19
degree attempted armed robbery and possession of narcotics and
20
resultant life sentence.
21
subsequently transferred to this Court.
22
contends that the prosecution was conducted in bad faith, his sentence
23
is unlawful, and he received ineffective assistance of counsel.
24
(Petition at 9-30.1)
25
to show cause why his Petition should not be dismissed because it is
26
time-barred.
(Petition at 1.)
The Petition was
(Doc. No. 4.)
Petitioner
For the following reasons, Petitioner is ordered
27
28
1
The Court uses the page numbers inserted by the electronic
docketing system to avoid confusion.
1
State prisoners seeking to challenge their state convictions in
2
federal habeas corpus proceedings are subject to a one-year statute of
3
limitations.
4
became final on February 6, 1996--60 days after he was sentenced and
5
the time expired for him to file an appeal.
6
F.3d 1065, 1067 (9th Cir. 2006); Lewis v. Mitchell, 173 F. Supp.2d
7
1057, 1060 (C.D. Cal. 2001).
8
conviction became final before the effective date of the statute of
9
limitations in April 1996, the one-year period began then and ended a
28 U.S.C. § 2244(d).
Here, Petitioner’s conviction
See Mendoza v. Carey, 449
For prisoners like Petitioner, whose
10
year later in April 1997.
See Patterson v. Stewart, 251 F.3d 1243,
11
1246 (9th Cir. 2001).
12
until January 5, 2018, almost 21 years after the deadline.
Petitioner, however, did not file this Petition
13
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, no later than March 9, 2018,
14
Petitioner shall inform the Court in writing why this case should not
15
be dismissed with prejudice because it is barred by the statute of
16
limitations.
17
recommendation that this case be dismissed.
18
Failure to timely file a response will result in a
DATED: February 7, 2018
19
20
21
PATRICK J. WALSH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S:\PJW\Cases-State Habeas\SINGLETARY, G 157\OSC dismiss pet.wpd
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?