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.

Murrell v. Davis

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Fort Worth Division

March 28, 2017

JIMMY RAY MURRELL JR., Petitioner,
v.
LORIE DAVIS, Director, [1]Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          Reed O'Connor United States District Judge

         Before the Court is a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 filed by petitioner, Jimmy Ray Murrell Jr., a state prisoner confined in the Correctional Institutions Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ), against Lorie Davis, director of TDCJ, Respondent. After considering the pleadings and relief sought by Petitioner, the Court has concluded that the petition should be dismissed as time-barred.

         I. BACKGROUND

         On January 15, 2013, pursuant to a plea agreement, Petitioner pleaded guilty in the 291st District Court of Wise County, Texas, Case No. CR16812, to aggravated robbery and the trial court assessed his punishment at 50 years' imprisonment. Adm. R., State Habeas R., vol. 3, 1147, ECF No. 10-17. Petitioner did not directly appeal his conviction or sentence. Pet. 3, ECF No. 1. On January 20, 2015, Petitioner filed a state habeas-corpus application, raising the same or similar claims presented herein, which was denied by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on April 1, 2015, without written order.[2] Adm. R., State Habeas R., vol. 3, 1165, ECF No. 10-17 & “Action Taken, ” ECF No. 10-1. Petitioner filed this federal habeas petition on January 12, 2016, [3] wherein he raises the following grounds for relief:

(1) An infirmity existed in the probable cause affidavit in support of the arrest warrant;
(2) The trial court abused its discretion by rejecting his motion to suppress evidence illegally obtained; and
(3) His trial counsel performed deficiently by failing to discover material evidence and use it in his defense.

Pet. 6-7, ECF No. 3

         Respondent contends the petition is time-barred under the federal statute of limitations.

         Resp't's Preliminary Answer 4-7, ECF No. 8.

         II. DISCUSSION

         Title 28, United States Code, § 2244(d) imposes a one-year statute of limitations on federal petitions for writ of habeas corpus filed by state prisoners. Section 2244(d) provides:

(1) A 1-year period of limitations 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 limitations 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 ...

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.