White v. Stenseth

Background

William Demont White, Jr. was convicted in Minnesota state court of two counts of second-degree murder, first-degree assault, and second-degree arson. The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions on direct appeal, and the Minnesota Supreme Court declined review on October 20, 2020. White later sought state post-conviction relief, including a claim that the prosecution violated Brady v. Maryland by failing to disclose that prosecution witness Laster was on parole at the time of the offense and trial. The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief, and the Minnesota Supreme Court denied review on December 19, 2023.

White filed this federal petition for a writ of habeas corpus on February 1, 2024. He raised four groups of claims: the alleged Brady violation; improper joinder of his trial with his codefendant’s trial; ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel; and violations involving an impartial jury. The respondent moved to dismiss on the ground that the petition was filed too late.

Analysis

Federal law generally gives a person in state custody one year to file a federal habeas petition. The court calculated that White’s state judgment became final for this purpose on March 19, 2021, after the applicable period for seeking review by the U.S. Supreme Court. Because the next filing deadline fell on a weekend, the court determined that White had until March 21, 2022, to file claims governed by that date.

White did not begin his state post-conviction proceedings until August 10, 2022. Although properly filed state post-conviction proceedings can pause the federal limitations period, the court concluded that White’s federal filing period had already expired before those proceedings began. Therefore, the state proceedings did not make the other claims timely.

White argued that his Brady claim received a later deadline because he did not obtain a certified court record concerning Laster’s parole status until June 10, 2022. The court rejected that argument. It concluded that White or his attorney could have discovered Laster’s status earlier through reasonable investigation, based on criminal-history and presentence-report information disclosed before trial. The court also relied on state-court factual findings that White had not rebutted with clear and convincing evidence.

The court separately rejected equitable tolling, which is an exceptional extension of a filing deadline. White argued that the COVID-19 pandemic prevented timely filing, but the court found that he did not show how the pandemic specifically prevented him from pursuing his claims during the relevant period. The court also noted that the deadline was more than two years after the pandemic began, that state courts were not shown to have remained abnormally unavailable, and that White was represented by counsel during at least part of the relevant period.

Recommendation and procedural status

Judge Docherty recommended that the respondent’s motion to dismiss be GRANTED, that White’s habeas petition be DENIED, that the matter be DISMISSED, and that no certificate of appealability be issued. The report expressly states that it is not an order or judgment of the district court and is not directly appealable. It allows specific written objections within 14 days after service, followed by a 14-day period for responses to objections.