IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
October 31, 2006
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. RICHARD JOHNSON A-82934, PETITIONER,
NEDRA CHANDLER, RESPONDENT.*FN1
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Milton I. Shadur Senior United States District Judge
Because petitioner Richard Johnson ("Johnson") had obviously misunderstood the full thrust of the statutory time limit for filing petitions under 28 U.S.C. §2254,*fn2 this Court issued an October 12, 2006 memorandum order ("Order") that spelled out the obvious untimeliness of Johnson's Petition and concluded in this fashion:
It orders the respondent to file, on or before October 27, 2006, either (1) a motion seeking dismissal on limitations grounds or (2) a statement that no such motion will be filed, following which this Court will determine the appropriate next step in this action.
On October 27 respondent, represented by Assistant Attorney General Russell Benton, did file a motion to dismiss the Petition. It has echoed the analysis set out in the Order, demonstrating that even with every available assumption being made in Johnson's favor he has failed to come within the limitations bar established by Section 2244(d). No further proceedings are required, for the situation is clearly that described in the second sentence of Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts:
If it plainly appears from the petition and any attached exhibits that the petitioner is not entitled to relief in the district court, the judge must dismiss the petition and direct the clerk to notify the petitioner.
This Court so orders--Johnson's Petition is dismissed.