Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
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.

Nguyen v. Liberty

United States District Court, D. Maine

April 19, 2018

HUY VAN NGUYEN, Petitioner,
v.
RANDALL LIBERTY, WARDEN Respondent

          RECOMMENDED DECISION ON 28 U.S.C. § 2254 PETITION

          John C. Nivison U.S. Magistrate Judge

         In this action, Petitioner Huy Van Nguyen seeks relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. (Petition, ECF Nos. 1, 16.) The State has requested dismissal because, the State argues, the petition was not timely filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). (Response, ECF No. 20.)

         After a review of the petition and the State's request for dismissal, I recommend the Court grant the State's request, and dismiss the petition.

         I. Factual Background and Procedural History

          Petitioner was indicted in February 2006 for kidnapping, in violation of 17-A M.R.S. § 301(1)(B)(1), and intentional or knowing murder, in violation of 17-A M.R.S. § 201(1)(A). (State v. Nguyen, No. ALFSC-CR-2006-00073 (Me Super. Ct., York Cty.), State Court Record (“Record”), ECF No. 20-1 at 3.) The State dismissed the kidnapping charge at the beginning of the June 2007 ten-day jury trial. (Response at 2 n.1; Record at 3, 14-17.) The jury found Petitioner guilty of murder. (Record at 17.)

         Petitioner filed a motion for a new trial; following a November 2007 hearing, the court denied the motion in January 2008. (Record at 17-19.) In April 2008, the court sentenced Petitioner to a 45-year term of imprisonment. (Record at 20.) In July 2008, the Sentence Review Panel denied Petitioner's application for leave to appeal from the sentence. (State v. Nguyen, No. SRP-08-246, Record at 23.)

         On March 2, 2010, the Law Court affirmed the judgment. State v. Nguyen, 2010 ME 14, 989 A.2d 712. Petitioner did not file a petition for a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court.

         On December 20, 2011, Petitioner filed a state court petition for post-conviction review. (Nguyen v. State, No. ALFSC-CR-2011-02726 (Me. Super. Ct., York Cty.), Record at 29.) The trial court entered the denial of the petition on February 18, 2016. (Record at 32.) The Law Court denied discretionary review on June 22, 2016. (Nguyen v. State, No. Yor-16-124, Record at 34-35.)

         Petitioner filed another state court petition for post-conviction review in December 2016; the court summarily dismissed the petition in February 2017. (Nguyen v. State, No. YRKCD-CR-2016-01090 (Unified Criminal Docket, York Cty.), Record at 37.)

         In his section 2254 petition, which Petitioner signed on June 15, 2017, and was filed on June 22, 2017, Petitioner asserts claims based on the jury instructions, the admission of impeachment evidence, and the prosecutor's closing argument. (Petition at 5-10.)

         II. Discussion

         Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a), a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a state court may apply to a federal district court for writ of habeas corpus “only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” Title 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d), which governs the time within which a petitioner must assert a claim under § 2254, provides:

(1) A 1-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 ...

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.