Hepple v. Attorney General of the State of New Mexico

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
MATTHEW STEPHEN HEPPLE,
Petitioner,
v. 	No. 23-cv-0864-MV-KRS
ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR
THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO,
Respondent.
ORDER TO ANSWER
This matter is before the Court on Petitioner Matthew Stephen Hepple’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Habeas Corpus Petition (Doc. 2) (Petition). Hepple challenges his state convictions based on, inter
alia, double jeopardy violations. The Court previously directed him to show cause why his § 2254
Petition should not be dismissed as untimely. See Doc. 5. Hepple filed a Response, which appears
to allege he did not commit the charged offenses. See Doc. 6. “[A]ctual innocence, if proved, serves
as a gateway through which a petitioner may pass” if his § 2254 petition would otherwise be barred
by the “expiration of the statute of limitations.” McQuiggin v. Perkins, 569 U.S. 383, 386 (2013).
Consideration of the actual-innocence exception “requires a holistic judgment” based on all
relevant evidence in the record. House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518, 539 (2006); see also Fontenot v. Crow,
4 F.4th 982, 1035–52 (10th Cir. 2021) (considering the entire record to evaluate the actual-
innocence claim).
Consistent with these authorities, and because the Court does not have the underlying state
record, Respondent Attorney General for the State of New Mexico (AG) must answer the Petition.
The answer must address the merits of Hepple’s § 2254 claims and whether Hepple has established
grounds to toll or overcome the habeas limitation period.
Case 2:23-cv-00864-MV-KRS Document 7 Filed 12/19/25 Page 1 of 2

2
IT IS ORDERED that the Clerk shall mail copies of this Order and Hepple’s 28 U.S.C.
§ 2254 Habeas Corpus Petition (Doc. 2) to Respondent Attorney General for the State of New
Mexico (AG) at the following address:
Attn: Federal Habeas Attorney(s)
New Mexico Department of Justice (formerly known as the Attorney General’s Office)
Criminal Appeals Division
201 Third St. NW, Suite 300, Albuquerque, NM 87102
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the AG must file an answer within 60 days of entry of
this Order. The answer must address the merits of each § 2254 claim and Hepple’s arguments
regarding tolling and the potential time-bar. If the Petition is mixed, such that it contains both
exhausted and unexhausted claims, the AG shall take a position on how to proceed (i.e., stay the
proceeding, dismiss the unexhausted claims, overlook the defect and deny the claim(s) on the
merits, etc). The AG must attach to its answer copies of all pertinent filings from the state trial
court, the state court of appeals, and the state supreme court; including memoranda filed by both
parties. The AG must also attach to the answer copies of all state post-conviction or appellate
proceedings and any transcripts that are needed to resolve the claims. All transcripts must be type-
written; the Court will not accept audio recordings in lieu of written transcripts.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Hepple may file an optional reply within 30 days after
the AG’s response is filed.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 19th day of December, 2025.
__________________________________
KEVIN R. SWEAZEA
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 2:23-cv-00864-MV-KRS Document 7 Filed 12/19/25 Page 2 of 2