United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
EDWARDS, Caryn Nieman Szyper INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL.
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS
R. SWEENEY II, JUDGE.
petition for writ of habeas corpus, petitioner Adrian Edwards
challenges his 2006 convictions in Indiana state court. The
respondent has filed a motion to dismiss, and Mr. Edwards has
not responded. For the reasons explained in this Order, the
respondent’s motion to dismiss, dkt. , is
granted, Mr. Edwards’s petition for a
writ of habeas corpus is denied, and the
action is dismissed with prejudice. In addition, the Court
finds that a certificate of appealability should not issue.
Edwards was convicted of two counts of murder and one count
of conspiracy to commit murder. Edwards v. State,
2007 WL 3378505, at *1 (Ind. Ct. App. Nov. 15, 2007)
(“Edwards I”). The trial court sentenced
Mr. Edwards to 55 years in prison for each murder plus 30
years for conspiracy to commit murder, for a total prison
term of 140 years. Id. at *2.
Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed on direct appeal.
Id. at *4. On March 24, 2008, the Indiana Supreme
Court denied Mr. Edwards’s petition to transfer. Dkt.
7-2 at 4. Mr. Edwards did not file a petition for writ of
certiorari in the United States Supreme Court, and the
deadline to do so was June 23, 2008.
September 8, 2008, Mr. Edwards filed his first petition for
post-conviction relief in state court. Dkt. 7-1 at 9. On May
22, 2013, he withdrew his first petition. Id. at 10.
December 12, 2013, Mr. Edwards filed a second state
post-conviction petition. Id. at 12. The trial court
denied relief, and the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed.
Edwards v. State, 2018 WL 817943, at *8 (Feb. 12,
2018) (“Edwards II”). On May 18, 2018,
the Indiana Supreme Court denied Mr. Edwards’s petition
to transfer. Dkt. 7-3 at 10.
April 22, 2019, Mr. Edwards mailed his petition for a writ of
habeas corpus, which was filed on April 23, 2019. Dkt. 2.
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