Stevenson v. Royce

Background

David Stevenson, who was incarcerated at Green Haven Correctional Facility, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his New York state-court conviction. The opinion states that he was charged with several offenses, including second-degree murder and second-degree arson. A jury found him guilty of second-degree murder, second-degree arson, third-degree weapon possession, and cruelty to animals. The trial court imposed consecutive sentences of 25 years to life on the murder and arson convictions.

The opinion contains different dates concerning the conviction: it states in one place that Stevenson was convicted on May 22, 2014, but it also states that the jury found him guilty on April 17, 2014. The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the conviction on February 28, 2018, and the New York Court of Appeals denied leave to appeal on May 16, 2018.

Timeliness issue

A federal petition challenging a state conviction generally must be filed within one year after the conviction becomes final, subject to certain exceptions. The court determined that Stevenson’s conviction became final on August 15, 2018, after the 90-day period for seeking review in the United States Supreme Court expired. The court therefore calculated that the one-year deadline was August 15, 2019.

Stevenson placed his petition in the prison mail collection box on October 1, 2019, which the court calculated as 47 days after the deadline. State post-conviction proceedings can pause the one-year period if they are pending before the period expires, but they do not restart an already expired period. Stevenson did not allege that he had filed any state post-conviction motions.

Order

The court directed Stevenson to file a declaration within 60 days showing why the petition should not be dismissed as time-barred. If he had filed state post-conviction motions, the court required him to identify the filing and decision dates and information about related appeals or requests for permission to appeal. If he had not filed such motions, he was directed to identify facts showing that he pursued his rights diligently and that an extraordinary circumstance prevented timely filing. The opinion explains that, in appropriate circumstances, severe mental illness or another serious obstacle may support pausing the deadline.

The court did not require Respondent Supt. M. Royce to answer at that time. It stated that, if Stevenson timely filed a proper declaration, the court would review it and could order a response. If he failed to comply and could not show good cause for the failure, the petition would be denied as time-barred. The court also stated that a certificate of appealability would not issue and denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The order itself did not yet dismiss the petition.