United States District Court, D. Connecticut
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT OF
Jeffrey Alker Meyer, United States District Judge.
Kenya Brown is a Connecticut state prisoner who is serving a
20-year sentence following his conviction on multiple
criminal charges. He has filed this pro se federal
petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254. For the reasons set forth below, I will dismiss
the petition on the ground that it was not timely filed
within one year of when Brown's state court convictions
September 18, 2003, Brown pleaded guilty in the Connecticut
Superior Court to multiple counts of attempted murder,
robbery, kidnapping, illegal possession of a weapon in a
motor vehicle, possession of narcotics with intent to sell,
and forgery. On November 7, 2003, he was sentenced to twenty
years imprisonment. Brown did not appeal his convictions or
sentence. See Brown v. Warden, State Prison, 2015 WL
9694344 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2015) (summarizing the Superior
Court plea proceedings).
October 11, 2012, Brown sought habeas corpus relief in state
court on the grounds that he had been denied effective
assistance of counsel, and that his pleas were not entered
knowingly and voluntarily. The state court denied Brown's
petition following a trial. See Brown v. Warden,
2015 WL 9694344. Brown appealed, and his appeal was dismissed
by the Connecticut Appellate Court on March 28, 2017. See
Brown v. Commissioner of Correction, 171 Conn.App. 903
(2017). Brown then petitioned the Connecticut Supreme Court
for discretionary review. His petition for review was denied
on May 17, 2017. See Brown v. Commissioner of
Correction, 325 Conn. 926 (2017).
filed this federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus on
May 2, 2018. He claims that his guilty pleas were not knowing
and voluntary, and he further claims that his trial counsel
rendered ineffective assistance of counsel.
federal court “shall entertain an application for a
writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody
pursuant to the judgment of a State court only on the ground
that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or
laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254(a). Federal law, however, imposes stringent time
limitations for prisoners to seek federal habeas corpus
relief. Subject to certain exceptions, federal law requires
that a federal petition for habeas corpus relief be filed
within one year of a prisoner's state court conviction
becoming final. See 28 U.S.C. §
court conviction becomes “final” at “the
conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for
seeking such review.” § 2244(d)(1)(A). Thus, a
conviction becomes “final” either on the date
when the highest court to which a petitioner has sought
direct review has denied relief or, if a petitioner has
not sought such further review, the date when the
time for seeking such direct review has expired. See
Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 150 (2012);
Williams v. Artuz, 237 F.3d 147, 151 (2d Cir. 2001).
Brown did not file any direct appeal from his convictions or
sentence. His convictions therefore became final on November
23, 2003, the date when the 20-day time period for filing an
appeal expired. See Connecticut Practice Book §
63-1. The date for him to file a federal habeas corpus
petition expired one year later on November 23, 2004.
eventually filed a state habeas corpus petition in October
2012. It is true that the filing of a state habeas corpus
petition tolls the one-year time period for the filing of a
federal habeas corpus petition. See 28 U.S.C. §
2244(d)(2). But in cases where the federal one-year time
period has already expired, the later filing of a state
habeas corpus petition does not “reset” the
one-year period for a petitioner to file a federal habeas
corpus petition. See Smith v. McGinnis, 208 F.3d 13,
17 (2d Cir. 2000). Accordingly, notwithstanding Brown's
filing of a state habeas corpus petition in 2012 and
notwithstanding his subsequent filing of this federal habeas
corpus petition in 2018 within one year of the date when the
Connecticut Supreme Court denied review of his state habeas
corpus petition in 2017, the time for Brown to file any
federal habeas corpus petition had already expired long
before he initiated any state habeas corpus
does not otherwise argue or establish any grounds to warrant
equitable tolling of the federal statute of limitations.
See Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631, 649 (2010).
Accordingly, the petition for writ of habeas corpus is not
timely and therefore must be dismissed.
on the foregoing, the petition for habeas corpus relief (Doc.
#1) is DISMISSED, and respondent's motion to dismiss
(Doc. #12) is GRANTED. Because petitioner has not made a
substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right,
see 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), no certificate of
appealability shall ...