Sivoris Sutton v. Burl Cain, Warden
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13758
5th Cir.2013Background
- Sutton was convicted of second-degree murder in Louisiana (convicted Feb. 6, 1993) and his convictions were affirmed on direct appeal (Jan. 31, 1996).
- Sutton proceeded pro se after his trial counsel withdrew; a joint certiorari petition with co-defendant Water was filed but Sutton did not sign it.
- The Louisiana Supreme Court denied certiorari on June 7, 1996, addressing only Water; Sutton claims he only discovered he was omitted in 1999 when he retained new counsel.
- On Feb. 9, 1999 Sutton moved the La. Supreme Court for permission to file an out-of-time certiorari petition (denied June 4, 1999) and filed a state habeas application that same day; state habeas ultimately concluded with denial by La. Supreme Court (Feb. 26, 2010).
- Sutton filed his federal habeas petition on Apr. 6, 2010; the district court dismissed it as untimely under AEDPA § 2244(d)(1) and denied equitable tolling; this appeal followed and a COA was granted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equitable tolling of AEDPA one-year limitations | Sutton: extraordinary circumstances (attorney withdrawal/abandonment, La. Supreme Court omission, actual innocence/IAC) justify equitable tolling | Cain: no extraordinary circumstance; delay due to Sutton's lack of diligence and his failure to notice unsigned joint petition | Court: denied equitable tolling — Sutton was not diligent and no extraordinary external impediment existed |
| Whether La. Supreme Court's denial of motion to file out-of-time certiorari was an adjudication on the merits that delayed "finality" under AEDPA | Sutton: the La. Supreme Court's language and analogies to Jimenez/Melancon/Grillette mean denial was effectively on the merits, so conviction became final after June 4, 1999 | Cain: Melancon/Grillette rely on Rule 4-3 (intermediate courts) and are inapplicable; La. Supreme Court rule disallows extensions and its order indicated denial on the showing made | Court: denial was not a merits adjudication for AEDPA finality purposes; Melancon/Grillette do not control; petition remained untimely |
Key Cases Cited
- Jimenez v. Quarterman, 555 U.S. 113 (2009) (out-of-time direct appeals toll finality for AEDPA statute of limitations)
- Melancon v. Kaylo, 259 F.3d 401 (5th Cir. 2001) (ambiguous state-court orders may toll AEDPA limitations when state rule permits discretionary consideration of untimely filings)
- Grillette v. Warden, Winn Corr. Ctr., 372 F.3d 765 (5th Cir. 2004) (ambiguous denials treated as merits adjudications in limited circumstances under Louisiana practice)
- Carey v. Saffold, 536 U.S. 214 (2002) (state-court procedural rulings and tolling considerations under AEDPA)
- Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408 (2005) (standards for equitable tolling — diligence and extraordinary circumstances required)
- Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631 (2010) (AEDPA's limitations period is subject to equitable tolling under proper circumstances)
- McQuiggin v. Perkins, 569 U.S. 383 (2013) (actual innocence can provide gateway to excuse AEDPA time bar)