United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
TYLER P. GRIMES, Petitioner
CYNTHIA LINK, Respondent
RICHARD P. CONABOY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
P. Grimes (Petitioner), an inmate presently confined at the
State Correctional Institution, Graterford, Pennsylvania
(SCI- Graterford), filed the above captioned habeas corpus
action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Named as Respondent
is SCI- Graterford Superintendent Cynthia Link. Service of
the petition was previously ordered.
states that he entered a guilty plea on November 21, 2013 to
charges of robbery, theft, burglary, receiving stolen
property, and conspiracy in the York County, Pennsylvania
Court of Common Pleas. According to the petition, Grimes was
sentenced that same day to an aggregate ten (10) year, three
(3) month to twenty (20) year, six (6) month term of
states that he did not pursue a direct appeal. See
Doc. 1, ¶ 8. On April 23, 2014, Grimes filed an action
pursuant to Pennsylvania's Post Conviction Relief Act
(PCRA). On March 25, 2015, Petitioner indicates
that the PCRA petition was withdrawn.
pending action, Petitioner claims entitlement to federal
habeas corpus relief on the grounds that trial counsel was
ineffective for advising him to reject an negotiated plea
agreement and to enter an open guilty plea and denial of his
right to appeal. See id. at ¶ 12.
has filed a motion seeking dismissal of this matter on the
basis that has not filed a timely habeas corpus action.
See Doc. 9. Grimes' pending § 2254 petition
is dated June 7, 2017,  and will be deemed filed as of that
date. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266 (1988) (a
prisoner's action is deemed filed at the time it is given
to prison officials for mailing to the Court).
2244(d) of Title 28 of the United States Code provides, in
relevant part, as follows:
(d)(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 for seeking
such review . . .
(d)(2) The time during which a properly filed application for
State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect
to the pertinent judgment or claim is pending shall not be
counted toward any period of limitation under this
See generally, Jones v. Morton, 195 F.3d.
153, 157 (3d Cir. 1999).
the plain terms of § 2244(d)(1)(A), the period of time
for filing a habeas corpus petition begins to run when the
period for direct review expired. See Harris v.
Hutchinson, 209 F.3d 325, 327 (4th Cir.
2000)("upon conclusion of direct review of a
judgment of conviction, the one year period within which to
file a federal habeas corpus petition commences, but the
running of the period is suspended for ...