No. 20-7123

Kenneth R. Heddlesten v. Scott Crow, Director, Oklahoma Department of Corrections

Lower Court: Tenth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-02-16
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: conviction-finality district-court-jurisdiction due-process habeas-corpus haynes-v-kerner jurisdiction limitations-period pro-se pro-se-petition statute-of-limitations statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2021-04-16
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. When was my conviction final?

2. When did the limitations period under 28 U.S.C. 2244(d)(1)(D) actually start?

3. Did the Caddo County District Court have jurisdiction to decide and render judgment in my case? I acknowledge that this question in and of itself is not directly related to the Districts Courts ruling that "No reasonable jurist could conclude the district courts procedural ruling was in correct. " However, I am under the impression that Jurisdiction is one issue that is never waived and can be addressed at any time. If that is incorrect I hope the Honorable Justices will remember that I am a layperson not formally educated or trained in the practice of law and request that my Petition be considered under the protection of Havnes v Kerner. 92 S. Ct. 594. M972V

Question Presented (AI Summary)

When was conviction final?

Docket Entries

2021-04-19
Petition DENIED.
2021-04-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/16/2021.
2020-11-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 18, 2021)

Attorneys

Kenneth R. Heddlesten
Kenneth Rex Heddlesten — Petitioner