The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard Mills, U.S. District Judge:
Friday, 07 September, 2012 01:22:25 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
The Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus [d/e 1] of Petitioner Farin A. Wells will be dismissed as untimely.
In early 2004, employees of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services became aware of allegations that the Petitioner had repeatedly sexually abused his three step-children.
In October 2005, a jury of the Circuit Court of Mason County, Illinois, found the Petitioner guilty of five counts of predatory criminal sexual assault, three counts of aggravated criminal sexual abuse, and two counts of criminal sexual assault. The Petitioner's post-trial motion was denied.
In December 2005, the Petitioner was sentenced to the following terms of imprisonment: natural life, fifteen years, ten years, and five years.
The Petitioner appealed to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth Appellate District. The Appellate Court affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Mason County in a 45-page unpublished order on June 25, 2007.
There is no information in the record to suggest that the Petitioner sought further direct review in the Supreme Court of Illinois or the Supreme Court of the United States.
On March 26, 2008, the Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief in the Circuit Court of Mason County, Illinois. The petition was denied by the Circuit Court on February 27, 2009. The Petitioner appealed, and the Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed the Circuit Court in an eight-page order, entered February 24, 2010. The Petitioner filed a petition for leave to appeal, which the Supreme Court of Illinois denied on September 29, 2010.
The Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States on December 13, 2010. The Supreme Court denied the petition on February 22, 2011.
The Petitioner signed the instant Petition [d/e 1] on July 29, 2011, and it was received by the Clerk of Court on August 1, 2011. He raised four claims: (1) there was insufficient physical evidence for him to be convicted of the offenses, (2) alleged improper admission of tapes, (3) allegedly inexperienced trial counsel failed to challenge a juror for cause, and (4) the natural life sentence imposed was excessive for a first-time offender.
The Respondent's Motion to Dismiss was filed on September 21, 2011. The Respondent argued that the Petition was untimely.
The Petitioner filed a Response to the Motion to Dismiss on September 28, 2011. The Petitioner argued that he is inexperienced in legal matters, that he was given incorrect and incomplete advice regarding post-conviction remedies and deadlines, and he invoked the doctrine of equitable tolling. The Petitioner states that extraordinary circumstances exist, and that he has diligently pursued his rights at each stage of the proceedings. The Petitioner supplied the dates of procedural events, according to his records. The Petitioner also requested that the Court grant a certificate of appealability should it dismiss his Petition.
In his one-paragraph Reply filed on September 29, 2011, the Respondent stated that he would rest on the facts, exhibits, and law cited in the Motion to Dismiss.