United States District Court, D. Maryland
FREDERICK E. JONES, Petitioner,
FRANK BISHOP, JR., Warden, and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Respondents.
Frederick E. Jones, an inmate at the Maryland Correctional
Training Center in Hagerstown, Maryland, filed this Petition
for a Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. S 2254
while he was incarcerated at North Branch Correctional
Institution in Hagerstown, Maryland. The Petition
collaterally attacks Jones's 2006 conviction for
attempted first-degree murder and related offenses in the
Circuit Court for Howard County, Maryland. Respondents have
filed a Limited Answer, seeking dismissal of the Petition as
time-barred. Jones has filed a Reply. Having considered the
submitted materials, the Court finds that no hearing is
necessary. See Rule 8(a), Rules Governing Section
2254 Cases in the United States District Courts; D. Md. Local
R. 105.6; Fisher v. Lee, 215 F.3d 438, 444-55 (4th
Cir. 2000). For the reasons set forth below, the Petition is
DISMISSED as time-barred.
October 12, 2006, a jury in the Circuit Court for Howard
County found Jones guilty of attempted first-degree murder,
first-degree assault, and violating a protective order. On
December 13, 2006, the Circuit Court sentenced Jones to life
imprisonment plus 90 days.
appealed. On August 22, 200,, the Court of Special Appeals of
Maryland affirmed his convictions and sentences in an
unreported opinion. Jones v. State, No. 2445 (Md.
Ct. Spec. App. Aug. 22, 2008). The mandate issued on
September 22, 200.. Jones did not pursue further review of
this decision in the Court of Appeals of Maryland. Thus, his
judgment of conviction became final 15 days later on Tuesday,
October 7, 2008. See Md. Rule 8-302(a) (West 2018)
(requiring that a certiorari petition be filed in the Court
of Appeals no later than 15 days after the Court of Special
Appeals issues its mandate).
Jones filed a Motion for Reconsideration of Sentence on
February 27, 2007, which the Circuit Court denied on March
27, 2007. On May 18, 2009 and June 5, 2009, Jones filed two
Motions for Reconsideration of Review of Sentence, which were
denied on June 17, 2009.
October 17, 2014, Jones filed a Petition for Post-Conviction
Relief in the Circuit Court for Howard County. The Circuit
Court held a hearing on July 1, 2015 and denied the Petition
on October 5, 2015. The Court of Special Appeals denied
Jones's Application for Leave to Appeal in an unreported
opinion filed on March 22, 206.. Jones v. State, No.
1975 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. Mar. 22, 2016). The mandate issued
on April 25, 2016. Jones filed the instant Petition for
federal habeas relief on May 20, 206.. See
Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988) (holding that
a prisoner's submission is deemed to have been filed on
the date it was deposited in the prison mailing system).
argue in their Limited Answer that the Petition should be
dismissed as time-barred because it was filed after the
expiration of the one-year limitations period established
under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Respondents assert that after
Jones's convictions became final on direct appeal and his
motions for reconsideration of his sentence were denied, more
than five years passed before he filed the Petition for
Post-Conviction Relief. Specifically, between June 17, 2009
and October 17, 2014, there were no pending state
post-conviction or other collateral review proceeding..
Respondents also argue that Jones provides no basis for
equitable tolling of the limitations period.
petition for a writ of habeas corpus may be granted only for
violations of the Constitution or laws of the United States.
28 U.S.C. S 2254(a) (2012). Such a petition is subject to the
following statutory limitations period:
(1) A one-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 constitutional right asserted was
initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if the right has
been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made