Meadows v. Biter
980 F. Supp. 2d 1148
C.D. Cal.2013Background
- Petitioner was convicted in 2009 in Los Angeles County Superior Court of three counts of residential burglary and one count of evading a police officer; sentence = 130 years to life under California Three Strikes.
- Direct appeal led to remand for re-sentencing; 2011 re-sentence to 44 years and four months.
- Petitioner filed a state habeas petition in 2012, which was denied; no direct appeal to California Supreme Court following remand.
- Petitioner filed federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on October 25, 2012, asserting innocence based on newly discovered evidence and ineffective assistance of trial counsel for juror-misconduct issues.
- District Court undertook de novo review of objections and recommended denial; magistrate judge’s report supported dismissal with prejudice.
- Court accepted the magistrate judge’s findings and denied a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the petition was timely under § 2244(d) | Petitioner argues timely under tolling | Timeliness expired before filing; untimely | Petition untimely; dismissed |
| Whether statutory tolling applies | Petitioner claims tolling during state proceedings | No tolling because no properly filed state petition within period | Statutory tolling does not save the petition |
| Whether equitable tolling applies | Entitlement to equitable tolling due to innocence claim | No basis shown for equitable tolling | Equitable tolling not warranted |
| Whether newly discovered evidence supports a later start date under § 2244(d)(1)(D) | Piolet statement could shift start date | Factual predicate known at trial; not newly discovered | No later start date; evidence not newly discovered under the statute |
| Whether actual innocence exception applies to overcome the limitations | Piolet statement establishes actual innocence | Statement unreliable; insufficient to show actual innocence | Actual innocence exception not met; gateway denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Thorson v. Palmer, 479 F.3d 643 (9th Cir. 2007) (tolling when state post-conviction review pending does not apply here)
- Ferguson v. Palmateer, 321 F.3d 820 (9th Cir. 2003) (state petition after limitations period cannot revive tolling)
- Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (U.S. 1995) (actual innocence gateway requires new, reliable evidence)
- Shumway v. Payne, 223 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2000) (actual innocence claims generally rejected as rare)
- Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (U.S. 1988) (mailbox rule for filing a habeas petition)
- Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390 (U.S. 1993) (affidavits after trial are to be treated cautiously)
- Lee v. Lampert, 653 F.3d 929 (9th Cir. 2011) (actual innocence standard under gateway)
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (U.S. 2003) (governs standards for evidence of a denied constitutional right on appeal)