United States District Court, D. Maine
ANGELO B. LICATA, Petitioner,
STATE OF MAINE Respondent
RECOMMENDED DECISION ON 28 U.S.C. § 2254
H. Rich III United States Magistrate Judge.
action, the petitioner, Angelo B. Licata, seeks relief
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See Petition
Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a
Person in State Custody (“Petition”) (ECF No. 1).
The state has requested dismissal because, the state argues,
the Petition was not timely filed under 28 U.S.C. §
2244(d)(1). See Respondent's Amended Motion to
Dismiss Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2254 (“Answer”) (ECF No. 10).
Following a review of the Petition and the state's
request for summary dismissal, I recommend that the court
grant the state's request and dismiss the Petition.
Factual Background and Procedural History
petitioner was convicted of murder, 17-A M.R.S.A. §
201(1)(B), on October 3, 2012, following a guilty plea.
See Docket Record, State of Maine v.
Licata, Docket No. SKOSC-CR-2011-00264 (Me. Super. Ct.)
(“Underlying Criminal Case”), Tab A to [Redacted]
State Court Record (“Redacted Record”) (ECF No.
10-1), attached to Answer, at 7. The court sentenced the
petitioner to a prison term of 30 years. See id.
petitioner did not appeal from the conviction. See
Id. at 7-8. On February 6, 2013, the Sentence Review
Panel of the Maine Law Court denied the petitioner's
application for leave to appeal from the sentence.
See Docket Record, State of Maine v.
Licata, Docket No. SRP-12-559 (Me.) (“Sentence
Appeal”), Tab B to Redacted Record, at 1-2.
October 31, 2013, the petitioner filed a state court petition
for post-conviction review. See Docket Record,
Licata v. State of Maine, Docket No.
SOMCD-CR-2013-01328 (Me. Super. Ct.) (“State
Post-Conviction Review”), Tab C to Redacted Record, at
1. The court appointed counsel in May 2014, and an amended
petition was filed in February 2015. See Id. at 1-2.
The court held an evidentiary hearing in January 2016.
See Id. at 3. The court denied the petition in May
2016. See id.
Court denied discretionary review on January 26, 2017.
See Docket Record, Licata v. State of
Maine, Docket No. Som-16-404 (Me.) (“Discretionary
Appeal”), Tab D to Redacted Record, at 2-3.
section 2254 Petition, which the petitioner states he placed
in the prison mailing system on January 26, 2018, and which
was filed on February 1, 2018, the petitioner alleges that
his due process rights were violated, his plea was
involuntary, he received ineffective assistance of counsel in
the plea process, and there was judicial bias in the
post-conviction proceeding. See Petition at 1, 5-12,
18. The petitioner attached to the Petition a copy of the
state court post-conviction decision. See PCR
Decision and Order, State Post-Conviction Review (ECF No.
1-2), attached to Petition. In essence, the petitioner
challenges the state court post-conviction decision, and,
thus, contends that he is entitled to relief under section
state requests dismissal based only on timeliness grounds.
See Answer at 3. The state court record is
correspondingly limited to the relevant state court docket
records. See Redacted Record.
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 a 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.”
turn, 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) governs the time within which
a petitioner must assert a claim under section 2254,
(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 ...