Michael Lynn Merrival, Jr. v. Alex Reyes, Acting Warden

24-2431Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit31 oct. 2025

Texte intégral

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-2812
___________________________
Michael Lynn Merrival, Jr.
lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant
v.
Alex Reyes, Acting Warden
lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the District of South Dakota - Western
____________
Submitted: October 7, 2025
Filed: October 14, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SMITH, KELLY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Michael Merrival, Jr. appeals after the district court1 dismissed his pro se 28
U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. The district court granted a certificate of
1The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the
District of South Dakota.

-- 1 of 2 --

appealability as to whether the timeliness determination was erroneous. Initially, we
grant Merrival’s motion to take judicial notice of documents filed in other court
proceedings. See Stutzka v. McCarville, 420 F.3d 757, 760 n.2 (8th Cir. 2005)
(appellate court may take judicial notice of judicial opinions and public records).
After careful de novo review, we conclude that the district court’s dismissal
was proper, as the petition was untimely, and Merrival was not entitled to equitable
tolling. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A) (habeas application challenging state court
judgment must be filed within 1 year of the date on which conviction became final);
Camacho v. Hobbs, 774 F.3d 931, 932 (8th Cir. 2015) (standard of review); Maghee
v. Ault, 410 F.3d 473, 476 (8th Cir. 2005) (“Equitable tolling is appropriate where
extraordinary circumstances beyond a prisoner’s control make it impossible to file a
petition on time, or where a defendant’s conduct lulls the prisoner into inaction.”);
see also Johnson v. Hobbs, 678 F.3d 607, 610-11 (8th Cir. 2012) (extraordinary
circumstance must be external and not attributable to petitioner).
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --

Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude

Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.