The opinion of the court was delivered by: Jeanne E. Scott United States District Judge
JEANNE E. SCOTT, U.S. District Judge
This matter comes before the Court on Respondent Gregory Sims' Motion to Dismiss (d/e 10). Petitioner Derrick Crawford filed a Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody (d/e 5) (Petition). Respondent moves to dismiss because the Petition is barred by the statute of limitations. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). The Court agrees. The Motion is ALLOWED.
In 1998, a jury in Sangamon County, Illinois, Circuit Court found Crawford guilty of murder. On August 18, 1998, Crawford was sentenced to 35 years imprisonment. On June 2, 2000, the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the conviction. On October 4, 2000, the Illinois Supreme Court denied Crawford's Petition for Leave to Appeal (PLA).
Crawford states that, sometime thereafter, he went to the prison law library for assistance in preparing a state post-conviction petition. Crawford states that he was assigned to a law clerk, and he was instructed to leave his paperwork with the law clerk and wait for instructions from the law clerk. Crawford states that he believed that there was nothing further he was supposed to do until instructed by the law clerk. Crawford states, "[A]fter which, the law clerk fell upon mishap, resulting in petitioner being unable to research, prepare and file his post-conviction petition." "Pro se" Petitioner's Response to Respondent's Motion to Dismiss Petition for Habeas Corpus Relief [28 U.S.C. § 2254] (d/e 12), at 2.
Crawford eventually filed a state post-conviction petition on March 19, 2007. The petition was dismissed as untimely. The dismissal was affirmed on appeal. The Illinois Supreme Court denied Crawford's PLA on March 25, 2009. Crawford then filed this Petition on May 12, 2009. The Respondent now moves to dismiss.
The statute of limitation for § 2254 petitions states:
(1) A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to an application for writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court. The limitation period shall run from the latest of --
(A) the date on which the judgment became final by the conclusion of direct review or the expiration of the time for seeking such review;
(B) the date on which the impediment to filing an application created by State action in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the applicant was prevented from filing by such State action;
(C) the date on which the constitutional right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if the right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review; or
(D) the date on which the factual predicate of the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through ...