Hudler v. Dretke

Fifth Circuit

Hudler v. Dretke

79 F. App'x 674

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedNovember 3, 2003

Docket03-40557

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 79 F. App'x 674 (Hudler v. Dretke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hudler v. Dretke, 79 F. App'x 674 (5th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Herbert William Hudler III, Texas prisoner # 803947, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as time-barred. The district court granted Hudler a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on the issue whether Hudler is entitled to the benefit of the doctrine of equitable tolling.

Hudler argues that the district court’s order denying his motion to stay the one-year limitations period of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) led him to believe that he would be permitted to file an out-of-time 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Hudler has not demonstrated that the district court abused its discretion in concluding that the order did not provide grounds for equitable tolling. See Molo v. Johnson, 207 F.3d 773, 775 (5th Cir.2000); see also Patterson, 211 F.3d at 932. Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

The remaining issues raised by Hudler in his appellate brief exceed the scope of the COA. As Hudler has not requested an expansion of the COA grant, this court will not consider those issues. See Lackey v. Johnson, 116 F.3d 149, 151 (5th Cir.1997).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM: *

Herbert William Hudler III, Texas prisoner # 803947, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as time-barred. The district court granted Hudler a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on the issue whether Hudler is entitled to the benefit of the doctrine of equitable tolling.

Hudler argues that the district court’s order denying his motion to stay the one-year limitations period of the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) led him to believe that he would be permitted to file an out-of-time 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition. Hudler has not demonstrated that the district court abused its discretion in concluding that the order did not provide grounds for equitable tolling. See Molo v. Johnson, 207 F.3d 773, 775 (5th Cir.2000); see also Patterson, 211 F.3d at 932. Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

The remaining issues raised by Hudler in his appellate brief exceed the scope of the COA. As Hudler has not requested an expansion of the COA grant, this court will not consider those issues. See Lackey v. Johnson, 116 F.3d 149, 151 (5th Cir.1997).

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 F. App'x 674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hudler-v-dretke-ca5-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack