Federici v. Mason

Summary

The United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania dismissed Ricky Federici’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition with prejudice as untimely. The court held that the one-year limitations period expired in March 2023 and that Federici’s later PCRA filing did not toll or restart the already expired period; it also denied a certificate of appealability.

Holdings

1. The petition was untimely because Federici's conviction became final on March 21, 2022, and he did not file his federal habeas petition until July 28, 2025, more than two years after the one-year limitations period expired.
2. Federici did not establish equitable tolling because his allegations concerning literacy, a learning disability, ineffective assistance, a Brady violation, and a hearsay issue were conclusory and undeveloped, and he did not show diligent pursuit of his rights or an extraordinary circumstance that prevented timely filing.
3. The July 2025 PCRA petition did not revive or restart the federal habeas limitations period because statutory tolling cannot pause a limitations period that had already expired more than two years earlier.
4. The district court could dismiss the petition sua sponte under Rule 4 because untimeliness was apparent and Federici received notice and an opportunity to respond.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the § 2254 petition was untimely under the one-year limitations period in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A).
2. Whether Federici established a basis for statutory or equitable tolling of the federal habeas limitations period.
3. Whether the filing of Federici's July 2025 PCRA petition restarted or tolled an already expired federal habeas limitations period.
4. Whether the petition should be dismissed sua sponte under Rule 4 after notice and an opportunity to respond.

Disposition

dismissed