Muhammad-Coleman v. LaGrand

United States District Court, District of Nevada · April 22, 2025 · No. 3:23-cv-00012-ART-CLB

Summary

This United States District Court order addresses a respondent's motion to dismiss a federal habeas corpus petition as untimely and a petitioner's opposing motion for a more definite statement. The court found that the respondents' motion failed to adequately plead the statute of limitations defense regarding specific claims, requiring greater specificity under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 and established habeas jurisprudence. Consequently, the court granted the motion for a more definite statement and denied the motion to dismiss without prejudice, allowing respondents 45 days to file a renewed motion.

Court
United States District Court, District of Nevada
Writing for the Court
Anne R. Traum
Jurisdiction
United States District Court, District of Nevada
Decision date
April 22, 2025
Docket number
3:23-cv-00012-ART-CLB
Procedural posture
Petitioner filed a habeas petition; respondents moved to dismiss for untimeliness and procedural default; court granted motion for more definite statement and denied motion to dismiss without prejudice.
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
other

Topics

motion for a more definite statementmotions to dismisscivil procedure

Practice areas

civil procedurepost-conviction relief

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the respondents' motion to dismiss sufficiently pleads the statute‑of‑limitations defense under Rule 15(c) and district practice.
  2. Whether the claims in the amended habeas petition relate back to the original petition for purposes of the AEDPA one‑year limitations period.

Holdings

  1. The motion for more definite statement is granted because the motion to dismiss fails to state the statute‑of‑limitations defense with the particularity required by the district's practice.
  2. The motion to dismiss is denied without prejudice, allowing respondents to file a renewed motion that properly pleads the statute‑of‑limitations defense.

Key quotations

The Court grants the motion for more definite statement and denies the motion to dismiss without prejudice. (end)

Factual background

In January 2017 a jury convicted Darion Muhammad‑Coleman of first‑degree murder, battery with a deadly weapon, conspiracy to violate the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, and attempted possession of a controlled substance. He was sentenced to an aggregate of 300 months to life. The Nevada Supreme Court and Nevada Court of Appeals affirmed his state convictions and post‑conviction habeas petition was denied.

Procedural history

Petitioner was convicted in the Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County, Nevada; state post‑conviction remedies were exhausted; a federal habeas petition was filed in December 2022 and amended in April 2024; respondents filed a motion to dismiss; petitioner moved for a more definite statement.

Remand instructions

Respondents have 45 days to file a renewed motion to dismiss that properly pleads all alleged bases.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…