Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 8-922 / 08-0188 Filed December 17, 2008

WILLIAM LOVELLE STRINGER, Applicant-Appellant, vs. STATE OF IOWA, Respondent-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Karen A. Romano, Judge.

Petitioner appeals the dismissal of his third application for postconviction relief as time-barred, contending that had the doctrine of equitable tolling been applied, his application would have been timely. AFFIRMED.

Brandon Brown of Parrish, Kruidenier, Dunn, Boles, Gribble, Cook, Parrish, Gentry & Fisher, L.L.P., Des Moines, and Angela Campbell of Dickey & Campbell Law Firm, PLC, Des Moines, for appellant. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Sharon Hall, Assistant Attorney General, John P. Sarcone, County Attorney, and Joseph P. Weeg, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State.

Considered by Mahan, P.J., and Vaitheswaran and Potterfield, JJ.

2 VAITHESWARAN, J. The district court dismissed William Stringer's third application for postconviction relief on the ground that it was time-barred. Stringer appeals the dismissal, contending that had the court applied the equitable tolling doctrine, his application would have been timely. I. Background Proceedings

In 1987, a jury found Stringer guilty of first-degree murder. This court affirmed his judgment and sentence in 1988. State v. Stringer, No. 87-473 (Iowa Ct. App. Aug. 24, 1988). Stringer then petitioned for a federal writ of habeas corpus. A United States district court held the application in abeyance pending Stringer's exhaustion of state remedies. Stringer next filed two state applications for postconviction relief, both of which were denied. He returned to federal court and pursued his habeas corpus petition. The United States District Court

granted habeas corpus relief, but the federal Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision in 2002. Stringer v. Hedgepeth, 280 F.3d 826, 831 (8th Cir. 2002). Stringer requested a writ of certiorari from the United States Supreme Court. That request was denied on October 7, 2002. Stringer v. Hedgepeth, 537 U.S. 909 (2002). Stringer filed his third state application for postconviction relief on October 25, 2006. The State moved to dismiss the application as untimely. Following an evidentiary hearing, the district court granted the motion and this appeal followed.

3 II. Analysis

The sole issue on appeal is whether Stringer's third postconviction relief application was timely filed. Our review of this issue is for correction of errors at law. Harrington v. State, 659 N.W.2d 509, 519 (Iowa 2003). Postconviction relief proceedings are generally governed by a three-year statute of limitations, but an exception exists for "a ground of fact or law that could not have been raised within the applicable time period."

Download WILLIAM LOVELLE STRINGER , Applicant - Appellant, vs. STATE OF IOWA, Respond

Iowa Law