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.

Hepner v. Davis

United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Austin Division

April 11, 2017

WAYNE EDGAR HEPNER
v.
LORIE DAVIS

          ORDER

          ROBERT PITMAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Before the Court are Petitioner's Application for Habeas Corpus Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, Memorandum in Support, and Response to Show Cause Order. Petitioner, proceeding pro se, has paid the applicable filing fee for this case. For the reasons set forth below, Petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed as time-barred.

         I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

         A. Petitioner's Criminal History

         Petitioner challenges the Director's custody of him pursuant to a judgment and sentence of the 299th Judicial District Court of Travis County, Texas, in cause number 94-2991. After a jury trial, Petitioner was found guilty of capital murder and was sentenced to life in prison. The Third Court of Appeals affirmed Petitioner's conviction and sentence on March 26, 1998. Hepner v. State, 966 S.W.2d 153 (Tex. App. - Austin 1998, no pet.).

         Petitioner also challenged his conviction and sentence in three state applications for habeas corpus relief. Petitioner indicates he filed his state application on June 13, 2001. However, state court records reflect Petitioner executed his first application on March 5, 2001. The Court of Criminal Appeals denied it without written order on June 27, 2001. Ex parte Hepner, Appl. No. 49, 596-01. Petitioner executed his second state application on June 5, 2007. The Court of Criminal Appeals denied it without written order on the findings of the trial court without a hearing on March 5, 2008. Ex parte Hepner, Appl. No. 49, 596-03. Petitioner executed his third state application on August 2, 2016. The Court of Criminal Appeals dismissed it as successive on October 5, 2016-04.

         B. Petitioner's Grounds for Relief

         Petitioner alleges as grounds for relief:

1. He was deprived of the automatism defense;
2. He is actually innocent, because he was offered 50 years, which would have had to been for the lesser included offense of murder; and
3. He received ineffective assistance of counsel.

         II. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

         A. Statute of Limitations

         Federal law establishes a one-year statute of limitations for state inmates seeking federal habeas corpus relief. See 28 U.S.C. ยง ...


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.