Court Opinion

ID: 9410535
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-21 18:00:43.148525+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:58.460655
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50325        Document: 00516828932             Page: 1      Date Filed: 07/21/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-50325
                                    Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                    ____________                                 July 21, 2023
                                                                                Lyle W. Cayce
   Paul Salazar,                                                                     Clerk

                                                                  Petitioner—Appellant,

                                            versus

   Bobby Lumpkin, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice,
   Correctional Institutions Division,

                                               Respondent—Appellee.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 5:19-CV-1489
                     ______________________________

   Before Haynes, Graves, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         This petition for writ of habeas corpus case involves Paul Salazar’s
   challenge to Texas convictions and sentences for continuous sexual abuse of
   a child and indecency with a child by exposure. The district court dismissed
   the case for failure to meet the one-year limitation period in 28 U.S.C.
   § 2244(d). Salazar sought a certificate of appealability (“COA”) from our
         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50325     Document: 00516828932           Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/21/2023

                                    No. 22-50325

   court asserting that, because he raised a substantial claim of ineffective
   assistance of trial counsel in his state collateral-review proceedings, during
   which he did not have counsel, the limitations should not apply. In so
   arguing, he relied upon the Supreme Court’s decision in Martinez v. Ryan,
   566 U.S. 1, 17–18 (2012) (addressing procedural default issues of ineffective
   assistance of counsel, not the time bar). While other circuits had addressed
   the question of whether Martinez applies in this context, we had not done so
   at the time the case was presented for a COA. Thus, we granted a COA “on
   Salazar’s contention that the rule of Martinez applies to the statute of
   limitations.”
          However, our court recently held that Martinez is inapplicable to
   AEDPA’s limitations period. Moody v. Lumpkin, 70 F.4th 884, 892 (5th Cir.
   2023). We are bound by that ruling. Accordingly, the petition for habeas
   relief is DENIED.

                                         2