United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
G. FLEISSIG, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on petitioner Michael Ford's
petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254. (Docket No. 1). For the reasons discussed below,
the Court will order petitioner to show cause why his
petition should not be dismissed as time-barred under 28
U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1).
October 5, 2011, petitioner was charged with first degree
murder and armed criminal action. State of Missouri v.
Ford, No. 1122-CR05948 (22nd Judicial Cir.,
St. Louis City). He was convicted on both counts on July 11,
2013, following a jury trial. On September 20, 2013,
petitioner was sentenced to life without parole. He filed his
notice of appeal that same day.
Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court on
February 10, 2015. State of Missouri v. Ford, 454
S.W.3d 407 (Mo. App. 2015). Petitioner did not file a motion
for rehearing or a motion to transfer to the Missouri Supreme
filed a motion to vacate pursuant to Missouri Supreme Court
Rule 29.15 on May 11, 2015. State of Missouri v.
Ford, No. 1522-CC01008 (22nd Judicial Cir.,
St. Louis City). The motion was denied on January 12, 2016,
and petitioner filed a notice of appeal on February 22, 2016.
On January 31, 2017, the Missouri Court of Appeals reversed
and remanded with instructions to the circuit court to
complete the record for purposes of determining the
timeliness of petitioner's amended motion to vacate.
State of Missouri v. Ford, 510 S.W.3d 360 (Mo. App.
rehearing on April 27, 2017, the circuit court again denied
petitioner's motion to vacate. State of Missouri v.
Ford, No. 1522-CC01008 (22nd Judicial Cir.,
St. Louis City). Petitioner filed a notice of appeal on June
6, 2017. The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit
court on March 6, 2018. State of Missouri v. Ford,
540 S.W.3d 889 (Mo. App. 2018). The Court of Appeals issued
its mandate on March 28, 2018. Petitioner placed the instant
petition in the prison mailing system on February 12, 2019.
(Docket No. 1 at 14).
of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases in the United States
District Courts provides that a district court shall
summarily dismiss a § 2254 petition if it plainly
appears that the petitioner is not entitled to relief. The
one-year statute of limitations found in the Anti-Terrorism
and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) begins to run
on the latest of four alternative dates. Jihad v.
Hvass, 267 F.3d 803, 804 (8th Cir. 2001).
Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1):
A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to an application
for 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 of conviction became final
by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of 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
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
exercise of due diligence.
United States Supreme Court has held that a judgment becomes
final under § 2244(d)(1)(A) when the time for seeking
review in the state's highest court expires. Gonzalez
v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 150 (2012). For Missouri
prisoners, such as petitioner, who do not file a motion to
transfer to the Missouri Supreme Court, the limitations
period begins to run fifteen days after the Missouri Court of
Appeals affirms a conviction on direct appeal. See
Camacho v. Hobbs, 774 F.3d 931, 935 (8th Cir.
2015) (stating that when a petitioner foregoes state appeals,
the court must look to state-court filing deadlines to
determine the expiration of the time for seeking direct
review); and Mo. S.Ct. R. 83.02 (stating that a party seeking
transfer to the Missouri Supreme Court must file an
application for such transfer “within fifteen days of
the date on which the opinion, memorandum decision, written
order, or order of dismissal is filed”). The Missouri
Court of Appeals affirmed petitioner's conviction on
February 10, 2015. ...