Tharpe v. Thaler
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 26120
| 5th Cir. | 2010Background
- Tharpe pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute cocaine in Texas and was placed on deferred-adjudication probation, not yet convicted or sentenced.
- After violating probation, the trial court convicted Tharpe and sentenced him to 25 years in prison; direct and post-conviction appeals followed.
- Tharpe pursued federal habeas corpus under AEDPA, asserting claims about both his deferred adjudication and his later conviction/sentence.
- The district court held the deferred-adjudication claims time-barred under Caldwell v. Dretke, applying a 1-year limit from finality of the deferred order.
- Tharpe appealed, challenging whether Burton v. Stewart modified Caldwell’s timeliness rule for deferred-adjudication claims.
- The Fifth Circuit held Caldwell’s timing for deferred-adjudication claims remains valid under Burton, affirming dismissal of those claims as untimely.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Caldwell applies to timing of deferred-adjudication claims after Burton. | Tharpe contends Burton undermines Caldwell's finality rule. | Tharpe's deferred-adjudication order is a separate judgment; Burton does not derail Caldwell's rule. | Affirmed: deferred-adjudication claims untimely under Caldwell, Burton does not alter that result. |
| Whether the AEDPA deadline for deferred-adjudication claims runs from finality of the deferred order. | Deadline starts when deferred order becomes final, tolling only for state petitions. | Deadline runs from finality of the deferred order, regardless of later events. | Held: deadline begins at finality of the deferred-adjudication order. |
| Whether Tharpe’s timely challenges to the conviction/sentence were properly analyzed as distinct judgments for AEDPA purposes. | Claims about conviction/sentence should be timely and meritorious if properly pursued. | Conviction/sentence constitute a separate final judgment; separate timing applies. | Held: separate judgments exist; timing for deferred-adjudication claims does not affect later conviction/sentence claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Caldwell v. Quarterman, 429 F.3d 521 (5th Cir. 2005) (deferred-adjudication finality triggers AEDPA deadline)
- Burton v. Stewart, 549 U.S. 147 (Supreme Court 2007) (final judgment includes conviction and sentence; second/ successive petition rules)