McCurtis v. Burke, 1:16-cv-07729

Delilah McCurtis was convicted in Illinois state court of first-degree murder for stabbing Latoya Jones; jury was instructed on second-degree murder and convicted McCurtis, who received a 27-year sentence.
Illinois Appellate Court affirmed in 2012; Illinois Supreme Court denied leave to appeal on November 28, 2012; conviction became final on February 26, 2013 (90 days for certiorari).
McCurtis did not file any Illinois post-conviction petition and filed a pro se federal habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on July 29, 2016 asserting: (1) improper testimony by the victim’s mother, (2) ineffective assistance of trial counsel (multiple sub-claims), (3) error in handling a jury question on second-degree instruction, and (4) wrongful admission of multiple inconsistent statements.
State moved to dismiss as untimely, procedurally defaulted, and partially noncognizable; district court focused on timeliness and procedural default.
Court held petition untimely under AEDPA’s one-year limitation and denied equitable tolling for asserted loss of legal papers (transfer between prisons) because McCurtis failed to show diligence or how long she lacked access.
Court also found nearly all claims procedurally defaulted for failure to present federal constitutional grounds in state court or on direct review, and McCurtis failed to demonstrate cause/prejudice or actual innocence to excuse the defaults.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness under AEDPA	McCurtis says transfer caused loss of legal papers preventing timely filing.	Petition filed July 29, 2016 — after AEDPA deadline (expired Feb 26, 2014); no tolling.	Petition is time-barred; equitable tolling denied for lack of diligence and detail about loss.
Equitable tolling standard	Claimed temporary loss of transcripts and other papers due to prison transfer.	State: petitioner didn’t show extraordinary circumstance or reasonable diligence.	Denied — petitioner failed to prove duration of lack of access or efforts to recover documents.
Procedural default / exhaustion	McCurtis contends constitutional claims now; argues reliance on trial record unavailable earlier.	State: claims not presented to Illinois courts as federal constitutional claims; post-conviction window passed.	Claims procedurally defaulted; failure to raise on direct review not excused; no cause or prejudice shown.
Cognizability of evidentiary claims	Challenges admission of inconsistent statements and testimony by victim’s mother.	State: some issues are state-law evidentiary matters and not cognizable on federal habeas.	Court did not reach full cognizability analysis for all claims but held the inconsistent-statements claim was presented only as state-law issue and thus treated as procedurally defaulted/nonfederal.

Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631 (equitable tolling requires extraordinary circumstance and diligence)
Jones v. Hulick, 449 F.3d 784 (7th Cir.) (finality date when certiorari time expires)
Weddington v. Zatecky, 721 F.3d 456 (7th Cir.) (intentional confiscation of legal papers can justify equitable tolling)
Socha v. Boughton, 763 F.3d 674 (7th Cir.) (equitable tolling and diligence—petitioner persistence matters)
Lloyd v. Vannatta, 296 F.3d 630 (7th Cir.) (lack of transcript generally does not warrant equitable tolling)
Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (Strickland deference to strategic decisions of counsel)
Premo v. Moore, 562 U.S. 115 (deference to reasonable trial strategies under Strickland)
Baldwin v. Reese, 541 U.S. 27 (must present federal claim to state courts to preserve it for federal habeas)
House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (actual innocence gateway to excuse procedural default requires new evidence likely to change verdict)
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (standard for certificate of appealability)
Kimmelman v. Morrison, 477 U.S. 365 (ineffective assistance claims require showing of incompetence)
Thomas v. Williams, 822 F.3d 378 (7th Cir.) (actual-innocence standard in default context)