38 F.4th 625
7th Cir.2022Background
- Ronnie Famous was convicted in Wisconsin in 1998 of multiple child‑sexual‑assault offenses and resentenced to 168 years; state appeals concluded in 2001 and certiorari was not sought.
- AEDPA’s one‑year limitations period began to run on Feb. 25, 2002, making Feb. 25, 2003 the filing deadline for federal habeas.
- Famous did not file in federal court until Aug. 17, 2010; the district court dismissed his petition as time‑barred and denied statutory and equitable tolling.
- Relevant factual events: appellate counsel allegedly retained Famous’s file until June 28, 2005; Famous gave the file to a jailhouse lawyer in July 2005 and prison officials confiscated it until April 30, 2007.
- Famous filed several state petitions (2007–2009) and exhausted additional claims 2013–2018 before amending his federal petition in 2019; the district court dismissed the federal petition on statute‑of‑limitations grounds and the Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Famous's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a state‑created impediment (lack/absence of AEDPA text in prison law library) tolled AEDPA under §2244(d)(1)(B) | GBCI didn’t provide a copy of AEDPA time limits, so he was prevented from learning the deadline | Mere unawareness of law or a terse allegation does not show a state‑created impediment; no adequate factual showing | Denied — Allegation too laconic; no factual development showing a state‑created impediment or basis for discovery |
| Whether district court abused discretion by denying discovery on statutory‑impediment claim | Discovery would show library lacked AEDPA and support statutory tolling | Petitioner’s bare assertion did not justify discovery; petitioner failed to present facts showing good cause | Denied — insufficient factual showing to permit discovery |
| Whether equitable tolling applies for period appellate counsel retained file and while file was with jailhouse lawyer | Retention and subsequent confiscation prevented timely filing; these were extraordinary circumstances | Even assuming retention, Famous had time when he controlled the file and was not diligent; entrusting file to another inmate is petitioner’s risk | Denied — not diligent while in possession; giving file to inmate does not excuse delay |
| Whether Famous’s chronic mental illness warrants equitable tolling | Severe, chronic psychiatric disorders made him unable to pursue claims timely | Medical record does not show incapacity during extended periods; records show organized thought and ability to function | Denied — district court’s factual finding that illness did not prevent timely filing was not clearly erroneous |
Key Cases Cited
- Estremera v. United States, 724 F.3d 773 (7th Cir. 2013) (lack of library access can be an "impediment" to filing)
- Socha v. Boughton, 763 F.3d 674 (7th Cir. 2014) (equitable tolling requires diligence plus extraordinary circumstance)
- Schmid v. McCauley, 825 F.3d 348 (7th Cir. 2016) (standard of review for district court’s tolling decisions)
- Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631 (2010) (equitable tolling requires diligence and extraordinary circumstance)
- Bracy v. Gramley, 520 U.S. 899 (1997) (discovery in habeas is discretionary and limited)
- Egerton v. Cockrell, 334 F.3d 433 (5th Cir. 2003) (library access/adequacy may support tolling)
- Whalem/Hunt v. Early, 233 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc) (prison library access can be an impediment)
- Paige v. United States, 171 F.3d 559 (8th Cir. 1999) (entrusting papers to another inmate does not justify tolling)
- United States v. Cicero, 214 F.3d 199 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (prisoner bears risk when giving legal files to another inmate)
- Mayberry v. Dittmann, 904 F.3d 525 (7th Cir. 2018) (abuse‑of‑discretion review of equitable tolling denials)
- Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 574 U.S. 318 (2015) (appellate review of district court factual findings is for clear error)