The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheridan, District Judge
This matter is before the Court on petitioner Darryl L. Jennings' petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254, in which he is challenging his 2000 New Jersey state court conviction and sentence. For reasons discussed below, it appears from review of the petition papers provided by petitioner that his § 2254 habeas petition is subject to dismissal as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d).*fn1
Petitioner, Darryl L. Jennings, filed a petition for habeas corpus relief on or about June 20, 2011.*fn2 According to the allegations contained in his petition, Petitioner was convicted pursuant to a plea of guilty on or about April 7, 2000, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County on charges of armed robbery, robbery and burglary. Petitioner was sentenced to a prison term of 60 years with a 30 year parole disqualifier. (Petition at ¶¶ 1-6).
Petitioner filed a direct appeal from his conviction and sentence to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. On or about September 18, 2001, the Appellate Division affirmed the conviction and sentence. The Supreme Court of New Jersey denied certification on January 10, 2002. State v. Jennings, 171 N.J. 41 (2002). Petitioner alleges that he filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States, on or about February 18, 2010. The petition was denied on or about April 29, 2010. (Pet., ¶¶ 8, 9 and 14).
Petitioner filed his first petition for post-conviction relief ("PCR"), pro se, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County, and again, he fails to provide the date on which he filed his state PCR petition. The PCR petition was denied on December 14, 2007. (Pet., ¶¶ 11). Petitioner appealed from the decision denying his PCR petition, which the Appellate Division affirmed in an unpublished opinion on July 21, 2009. State v. Jennings, 2009 WL 2147912 (N.J. Super. A.D. July 21, 2009). The Supreme Court of New Jersey denied certification on or about November 10, 2009. (Pet., ¶ 12(e)). State v. Jennings, 200 N.J. 504 (2009).
As stated above, Petitioner filed this federal habeas petition on June 20, 2011.
A pro se pleading is held to less stringent standards than more formal pleadings drafted by lawyers. Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976); Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). A pro se habeas petition and any supporting submissions must be construed liberally and with a measure of tolerance. See Royce v. Hahn, 151 F.3d 116, 118 (3d Cir. 1998); Lewis v. Attorney General, 878 F.2d 714, 721-22 (3d Cir. 1989); United States v. Brierley, 414 F.2d 552, 555 (3d Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 399 U.S. 912 (1970).
III. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS ANALYSIS The limitation period for a §
2254 habeas petition is set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d),*fn3
which provides in pertinent part:
(1) A 1-year period of limitations 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; ...
(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 section.
Section 2244(d) became effective on April 24, 1996 when the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA") was signed into law. See Burns v. Morton, 134 F.3d 109, 111 (3d Cir. 1998); Duarte ...