Moreland v. Eplett

Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing as untimely defendant’s habeas petition that challenged his reckless homicide conviction, where said petition was filed nine days after expiration of applicable one-year period for filing habeas petition. Defendant asserted that said time for filing his habeas petition should have been equitably tolled because he suffered from schizophrenia, and because on several occasions he was unable to research his case due to lack of access to prison library. However, record showed that: (1) 353 days of limitations period had elapsed before defendant had filed state post-conviction petition that essentially tolled habeas filing period until after his ultimately unsuccessful state post-conviction petition had been resolved; (2) defendant waited 21 days after conclusion of state post-conviction petition to file instant habeas petition; and (3) defendant presented almost no evidence of what he was doing to pursue his rights during first 353 days of his limitations period. As such, Dist. Ct. could properly find that defendant did not diligently pursue his rights for purposes of qualifying for equitable tolling, and record otherwise showed that defendant’s schizophrenia did not actually impair his ability to pursue his claims. Ct. further noted that fact that defendant had been placed in administrative segregation and was without his legal materials for two-week period did not establish extraordinary circumstances to support his equitable tolling claim, since defendant’s problems generated by his prison experience accounted for only very small percentage of his limitations period.