United States District Court, D. Arizona
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Honorable John Z. Boyle United States Magistrate Judge
HONORABLE JOHN J. TUCHI, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:
James Robert Holland has filed a pro se Petition for Writ of
Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Doc. 1.)
Summary of Conclusion.
was sentenced on October 2, 2014, and his sentence was final
90 days later because he did not pursue post-conviction
relief until 2018. The instant Petition was due January 1,
2016 but was not filed until December 6, 2018.
Petitioner's claim is untimely. Petitioner presents no
extraordinary circumstances to justify equitable tolling.
Therefore, the Court will recommend that the Petition be
denied and dismissed with prejudice.
Facts and Trial Procedural History.
August 21, 2014, Petitioner pleaded guilty to felony offenses
in two separate cases. (Doc. 11-1, Exs. F, G, at 42-46.) On
October 2, 2014, Petitioner was sentenced in both cases.
(Doc. 11-1, Ex. H at 27; Doc. 11-2, Ex. I, at 1.) The Court
summarized the conviction history:
In Maricopa County Superior Court, case #CR2013-432246,
Petitioner was convicted of one count of sexual exploitation
of a minor and two counts of attempted sexual exploitation of
a minor. He was sentenced to a 10-year term of imprisonment,
followed by lifetime probation. In Maricopa County Superior
Court, case #CR2013-103231, Petitioner was convicted of
second-degree burglary. He was sentenced to an 8-year term of
imprisonment, to be served after his sentence in
CR2013-432246. In his Petition, Petitioner names Charles L.
Ryan as Respondent and the Arizona Attorney General as an
(Doc. 6 at 1-2.)
Petitioner's State Post Conviction Relief
29, 2018, Petitioner filed a post-conviction relief
(“PCR”) notice. (Doc. 11-2, Ex. J, at 8.) On June
11, 2018, the Maricopa County Superior Court found that
Petitioner's PCR claims were “untimely by more than
three years, ” and that Petitioner failed to provide
reasons for the untimeliness. (Doc. 11-2, Ex. K, at 13.) The
Superior Court dismissed the Petition. (Id. at 14.)
20, 2018, Petitioner filed a Petition for Review with the
Arizona Court of Appeals. (Doc. 11-2, Ex. L, at 15.) On
October 30, 2018, the Arizona Court of Appeals denied relief
finding no abuse of discretion in the prior proceeding. (Doc.
11-12, Ex. M at 23.) On December 14, 2018, the mandate
issued. (Doc. 11-2, Ex. N, at 25.)