Winston Grey B. v. Alejandro Reyes

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Dakota denies the petitioner’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) to alter or amend the judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition as untimely. The court concludes that the motion presents no new law undermining its prior conclusion and that South Dakota statutes and case law cannot extend or override the applicable federal habeas limitations period.

Holdings

1. Relief under Rule 59(e) was not warranted because petitioner identified no new law or other basis establishing a manifest error in the court's prior conclusion that his § 2241 petition was untimely.
2. South Dakota statutes and South Dakota case law cannot extend or overrule the federal habeas limitations law applicable to petitioner's § 2241 petition.

Questions Presented

1. Whether petitioner met the requirements for relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) from the judgment dismissing his § 2241 petition as untimely.
2. Whether South Dakota statutes or state case law could extend or override the federal one-year limitations period governing the habeas petition.
3. Whether petitioner's arguments concerning an ongoing sentence, Rule 35, and equitable tolling established a basis to alter or amend the judgment.

Disposition

other