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.

Dillard v. Edmonds

United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division

September 26, 2017

TYRONE DEON DILLARD, Petitioner,
v.
LARRY T. EDMONDS, Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          HON. JACKSON L. KISER SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Tyrone Deon Dillard, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging the validity of his confinement on a judgment in the Appomattox County Circuit Court for possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute as a third or subsequent offense. Respondent filed a motion to dismiss, and Dillard responded, [1] making the matter ripe for disposition. After review of the record, I grant the motion to dismiss and dismiss the petition.

         I. Procedural History

         Dillard pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute as a third or subsequent offense, and on January 16, 2014, the trial court entered final judgment, sentencing him to ten-and-a-half years in prison. Dillard filed a motion to reconsider in the circuit court, but did not appeal.

         On November 5, 2014, Dillard filed a state habeas petition in the circuit court; the court denied his petition on August 19, 2015. On December 8, 2015, Dillard appealed to the Supreme Court of Virginia, but the court dismissed his appeal on June 3, 2016, for failure to timely file the notice of appeal under Va. Sup. Ct. R. 5:9(a), and because Dillard's assignments of error were insufficient under Va. Sup. Ct. R. 5:17(c)(1)(iii). On October 7, 2016, the Supreme Court of Virginia denied Dillard's petition for rehearing because it was also untimely filed.

         II. Claims

         On September 19, 2016, Dillard filed the current petition, alleging that trial counsel was ineffective for:

1. Failing to advise and act on a plea offer; and
2. Failing to advise Dillard of the charge and sentencing range to which he was pleading guilty.

         III. Time-Bar

         Dillard's claims are time-barred. Under the Anti-terrorism Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), a one-year period of limitation for federal habeas corpus runs 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 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 ...

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.