Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

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.

Glenn v. Lyons

United States District Court, D. Maryland

July 7, 2017

DARIN GLENN Petitioner



         In answer to the above-entitled Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. S2254, Respondents assert that the petition must be dismissed as untimely. ECF I1. Petitioner was provided an opportuntty to file a Reply addressing the timeliness of the petition and asserting, if applicable, any basis for equitable tolling of the filing deadline. ECF 12 & 14. Petitioner instead filed Motions for Appointment of Counse.. ECF 15 & 16. Upon review of the pleadings filed, the Court finds no need for an evidentiary hearing. See Rule 8(a), Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts and Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2016); see also Fisher v. Lee, 215 F.3d 438, 455 (4th Cir. 2000) (petitioner not entitled to a hearing under 28 U.S.C. s2254(e((2).. For the reasons stated below, Petitionerss motions will be denied, the Petition shall be dismissed as untimely, and a Certificate of Appealability shall not issue.


         On April 20, 1999, Petitioner Darin Glenn was found guilty of first degree murder, attempted second degree murder, and related offenses in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.

         ECF II at Ex. I and 2. On June 8, 1999, Glenn was sentenced to serve a life sentence plus a consecutive term of 40 years. Jd. Glenn's conviction was affirmed on June 15, 2000 in an unreported opinion from the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. !d. at Ex. 2. Further review was denied on November 13, 2000, when the Court of Appeals declined further review. Jd. Glenn did not file a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. For purposes of calculating the federal habeas corpus deadline, Glenn's conviction became final as of February 12, 200,, the date the time for seeking review with the United States Supreme Court expired. See Sup. Ct. Rule 13.1 (90 day period of time for filing certiorari petition).

         On November 2, 2001, Glenn filed a petition for post-conviction relief in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City. ECF II at Ex. I. At that time, 262 days elapsed where no legal proceedings regarding the conviction were pending in the Maryland courts which would operate to toll the filing deadline to seek federal habeas relief, leaving Glenn with 103 days to file a federal habeas petition at the conclusion of post-conviction proceeding..

         On November 24, 2003, Glenn withdrew his petition for post-conviction relief without prejudice. Jd. The withdrawal of the petition operated to begin the federal habeas limitations period running again. See Coates v. Byrd, 211 F.3d 1225 (11th Cir. 2000) (per cunam) (AEDPA clock restarts when state court completes post-conviction review); Lawrence v. Florida. 549 U.S. 327 (same). The 103 days left on the 365 day limitations period expired on March 8, 2004.

         Glenn filed another petition for post-conviction relief on November 3, 2008, which was denied on July 22, 2014. Glenn filed an application for leave to appeal the post-conviction court's denial of relief with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, which was denied on April 16, 2015. ECF II at Ex. 3. The mandate issued on May 18, 2015.

         A one-year statute of limitations applies to habeas petitions in non-capital cases for a person convicted in a state court. See 28 U.S.C. S 2244(d). This section provides:

(1) A I-year period of limitation shall apply to an application for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court. The limitation period shall run 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 constituiionll right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if the right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review; or
(D) the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the ...

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.