WILLIAMS v. JOHNSTON

Filing 5

ORDER denying 4 Motion for Rule 60 relief. Signed by Judge Donetta W. Ambrose on 2/16/18. (ask)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

RICHARD CARRINGTON WILLIAMS

v.
PHILLIP L. JOHNSTON

)
)
)
)

CV 1-499

MEMORANDUM ORDER
This civil action number relates to Mr. William’s petition for habeas corpus pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2254, filed on March 15, 2001, and denied by Order dated April 25, 2001. On
November 30, 2017, Defendant filed a pro se Motion pursuant to Rule 60(b)(6). The caption of
that Motion names as defendants Barry Smith, identified as the Superintendent of SCIHoutzdale, and the Allegheny County District Attorney. Such a Motion must be made within “a
reasonable time.”
Defendant purports to bring his Motion pursuant to a change in the law, which he
contends would render his Motion timely. His Motion asserts entitlement to relief based on “a
multitude of Misconducts; Ineffective assistance of counsel; false identification; Violation of
Petitioners right to a constitutionally fair trial, Etc.” This multitude includes: witness testimony
at trial that was “questionable”; denial of an opportunity to present an alibi to the jury, and
ineffective trial, appellate, and post-conviction counsel vis-à-vis the alibi; and the trial court’s
failure to make credibility and factual findings. I have carefully reviewed the entirety of
Defendant’s submissions, under liberal standard applicable to pro se litigants. Even assuming
that Defendant could proceed against the Defendants named in his Motion, he has stated no

grounds that would warrant consideration of his Motion sixteen-and-a half years after the
pertinent judgment. Under the circumstances, the Motion was not filed within a reasonable
time, and will be denied.
AND NOW, this 16th day of February, 2018, IT IS SO ORDERED.
BY THE COURT:

______________________________
Donetta W. Ambrose
Senior Judge, U.S. District Court