United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DISMISSING THE PETITION FOR A
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AND DENYING A CERTIFICATE OF
COHN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
a habeas case under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Michigan prisoner
Naymon Stewart (“Petitioner”) is proceeding
pro se. Petitioner plead guilty to second-degree
murder and possession of a firearm during the commission of a
felony in state court and was sentenced to consecutive terms
of 25 to 40 years imprisonment and two years imprisonment in
2012. In his petition, he challenges the validity of his plea
and sentence raising claims concerning the factual basis for
his plea, the effectiveness of trial and appellate counsel,
the accuracy of his plea, the voluntariness of his plea, the
scoring of the sentencing guidelines, and the trial
court's refusal to reissue the judgment of sentence.
acknowledges that his habeas petition is untimely under the
one-year statute of limitations applicable to habeas actions
but says that he is entitled to equitable tolling of the
one-year period based upon actual innocence because he acted
in self-defense. For the reasons that follow, the petition
will be dismissed as untimely.
sentencing, Petitioner filed a delayed application for leave
to appeal with the Michigan Court of Appeals, which was
denied on April 16, 2014. People v. Stewart, No.
320814 (Mich. Ct. App. April 16, 2014). Petitioner attempted
to file an application for leave to appeal with the Michigan
Supreme Court. However, the application was rejected as
untimely under the 56-day time limit for filing such
21, 2015, Petitioner filed a motion for relief from judgment
in the trial court. The trial court denied the motion on
August 21, 2105. People v. Stewart, No.
11-011355-01-FC (Wayne Co. Cir. Ct. Dkt.). He then filed a
delayed application for leave to appeal with the Michigan
Court of Appeals, which was denied for failure to establish
that the trial court erred in denying his motion for relief
from judgment. People v. Stewart, No. 330906 (Mich.
Ct. App. March 24, 2016). Petitioner filed an application for
leave to appeal with the Michigan Supreme Court, which was
denied for failure to meet the burden of establishing
entitlement to relief under Michigan Court Rule 6.508(D).
People v. Stewart, 500 Mich. 896 (Nov. 30, 2016).
March 14, 2017, Petitioner dated and filed the petition.
noted above, there is a question as to whether Petitioner has
complied with the one-year statute of limitations, as
Petitioner himself appears to concede it is not timely. The
(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
limitation period shall run from the latest of--
(A) the date on which the judgment became final by the
conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for
seeking such review;
(B) the date on which the impediment to filing an application
created by State action in violation of the Constitution or
laws of the United States is removed, if the applicant was
prevented from filing by such State action;
(C) the date on which the constitutional right asserted was
initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if the right has
been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made