United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ENTRY DENYING PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
AND DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
Jane Magnus-Stinson, Chief Judge United States District Court
reasons explained in this Entry, Harold Wayne Reynolds'
petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied. In addition,
the Court finds that a certificate of appealability should
The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
is a state prisoner incarcerated at Plainfield Correctional
Facility. He is currently serving an eighteen year sentence
January 27, 2014, the State of Indiana charged Reynolds with
burglary, as a Class C felony, attempted theft, as a Class D
felony, and resisting law enforcement, as a Class A
misdemeanor. The State also alleged Reynolds to be a habitual
jury trial commenced on May 27, 2014. At the close of the
State's evidence, the resisting law enforcement charge
was dismissed. On May 28, 2014, the jury returned guilty
verdicts on the burglary and attempted theft charges.
Reynolds then admitted to being a habitual offender. On June
25, 2014, the trial court found that the burglary merged with
attempted theft and entered a judgment of conviction on the
burglary charge. The court also found Reynolds to be a
habitual offender. Reynolds was sentenced to six years in the
Indiana Department of Correction for burglary, enhanced by
twelve years due to the habitual offender determination.
See Reynolds v. State, 73A01-1407-CR-314
(Ind.Ct.App. June 5, 2015) (Memorandum Decision) at dkt. 7-5.
appealed to the Indiana Court of Appeals. On June 5, 2015,
that court affirmed Reynolds' conviction and sentence.
Reynolds did not file a petition to transfer to the Indiana
filed a petition for post-conviction relief in state court on
September 22, 2015. That petition was denied by the
post-conviction court on October 19, 2016. Reynolds did not
filed the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus in
this Court on October 2, 2017.
challenges his state-court conviction and sentence on the
grounds that he received ineffective assistance of counsel.
The respondent argues that Reynolds' petition must be
denied because it is untimely. For the reasons explained
below, this Court agrees that Reynolds' petition is
untimely and that his petition for a writ of habeas corpus
must be dismissed with prejudice.
attempt to “curb delays, to prevent
‘retrials' on federal habeas, and to give effect to
state convictions to the extent possible under law, ”
Congress, as part of the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death
Penalty Act of 1996, revised several of the statutes
governing federal habeas relief. Williams v. Taylor,
529 U.S. 362, 404 (2000). Along with triggering dates not
applicable here, “[u]nder 28 U.S.C. §
2244(d)(1)(A), a state prisoner seeking federal habeas relief
has just one year after his conviction becomes final in state
court to file his federal petition.” Gladney v.
Pollard, 799 F.3d 889, 894 (7th Cir. 2015). “The
one-year clock is stopped, however, during the time the
petitioner's ‘properly filed' application for
state postconviction relief ‘is pending.'”
Day v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 198, 201 (2006) (quoting
28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2)).
Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed Reynolds' conviction on
June 5, 2015. He had 30 days to petition to transfer to the
Indiana Supreme Court. He failed to do so. Thus, the one-year
clock started to run when his conviction became final on
Monday July 6, 2015. See Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565
U.S. 134, 150 (2012) (“[T]he ...