United States District Court, W.D. Texas, Austin Division
ORDER
ROBERT
PITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Before
the Court are Petitioner’s Application for Habeas
Corpus Relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Document 1) and
response to the Court’s order to show cause (Document
6). Petitioner, proceeding pro se, has been granted leave to
proceed in forma pauperis. For the reasons set forth below,
the undersigned finds that Petitioner’s application for
writ of habeas corpus should be dismissed as time-barred.
STATEMENT
OF THE CASE
A.
Petitioner’s Criminal History
Petitioner
challenges his conviction in cause number D-1-DC-13-904096
out of Travis County, Texas. Petitioner was convicted of
capital murder and sentenced to life without parole. The
First Court of Appeals affirmed Petitioner’s conviction
on November 5, 2015. Manuel v. State, 481 S.W.3d 278
(Tex.App. Houston [1st Dist.] 2015, pet. ref’d). On
April 6, 2016, the Court of Criminal Appeals refused
Petitioner’s petition for discretionary review.
Manuel v. State, No. PD-1651 (Tex.Crim.App.).
Petitioner also challenged his conviction in a state
application for habeas corpus relief. Petitioner executed his
state application on August 7, 2018. The Court of Criminal
Appeals denied it without written order on April 17, 2019.
Ex parte Manuel, No. 89, 497-01.
B.
Grounds for Relief
Petitioner
raises the following grounds for relief:
1. His
conviction was obtained by fraud making the rejection of a
20-year plea offer involuntary;
2. He
received ineffective assistance of trial counsel; and
3. He
received ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.
DISCUSSION
AND ANALYSIS
A.
Statute of Limitations
Petitioner’s
claims are barred by the applicable 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. § 2244(d). That section provides,
in relevant part:
(d)(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
...