Summary
This memorandum opinion and order addresses a pro se prisoner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The court evaluates the Respondent's motion to dismiss based on the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act's one-year statute of limitations, focusing on whether newly discovered ballistics evidence from 2011 tolls or restarts the limitations period. The court grants the motion in part by dismissing claims unrelated to the new evidence as time-barred, but denies it in part regarding the remaining claim, ordering further briefing on both timeliness and the merits.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the petition is timely under 28 U.S.C. §2244(d)(1)(A) and (D)
- Whether the 2011 lab report constitutes a newly discovered factual predicate sufficient to toll the limitations period
Holdings
- The petition is untimely on those grounds; the motion to dismiss is GRANTED in part.
- The petition is timely on Ground Two; the motion to dismiss is DENIED as to that ground.
Key quotations
“The evidence upon which Petitioner relies—the 2011 lab report—did not exist at the time of his trial, and so the Court finds it is therefore newly discovered.” (at *1)
“Under § 2244(d)(1)(D), the one‑year limitations period begins to run on “the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence.”” (at 126-27)
Factual background
Magee was convicted of felony murder, armed robbery, and firearm offenses in 2005. A 2011 Michigan State Police lab report re‑examined the ballistic evidence and identified two bullets as fired from the same firearm, with three others inconclusive. Magee did not learn of this report until 2019 and filed a habeas petition in 2023 asserting ineffective assistance and newly discovered evidence.
Procedural history
Petitioner was convicted of first‑degree murder and related offenses in Michigan state court. Direct appeal and state post‑conviction remedies were exhausted in 2007. A 2011 forensic lab report later raised new ballistic evidence. Petitioner filed a federal habeas petition in September 2023. Respondent moved to dismiss for untimeliness.
Remand instructions
Respondent must file an Answer/Return of Writ on or before April 29, 2025; Petitioner’s Reply/Traverse due 30 days thereafter; Respondent may file a Sur‑Reply within 14 days thereafter.