Taylor v. Williams et al

Filing 21

MEMORANDUM Order; The Attorney General's Office is ordered to file an answer to Taylor's Petition complying with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts on or before September 30, 2015. Tayl or s Motion for Attorney Representation 4 is granted and, in accordance with the practice regularly employed in this District in such Section 2254 cases, appoints the Federal Defender Program to provide Taylor with legal representation by designating one of its staff attorneys or a member of its attorney panel to act as his pro bono counsel. Signed by the Honorable Milton I. Shadur on 8/4/2015:Mailed notice(clw, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel.
DENNIS TAYLOR,
Petitioner,
v.
TARRY WILLIAMS, Custodian, Warden,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 15 C 4969

MEMORANDUM ORDER
On August 3 this Court issued its brief memorandum order that explained the need to
review the then-anticipated response from the Attorney General's Office as to the one open
question on the potential limitations issue that might stand in the way of the pro se habeas
Petition brought by state prisoner Dennis Taylor ("Taylor"). But the ink was scarcely dry on that
memorandum order (an anachronistic metaphor in this electronics-dominated era) when this
Court received another thoughtful filing from the Assistant Attorney General assigned to the
case -- a filing that included a documentary showing that Taylor's pro se Petition for Leave To
Appeal filed with the Illinois Supreme Court on February 7, 2012 had clearly extended the
tolling period under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2). 1 That being so, it followed that Taylor was not
vulnerable under the Section 2244(d)(1) limitation period when he filed his Petition before this
Court.
_________________________
1
All further references to Title 28's provisions will simply take the form "Section --,"
omitting the prefatory "28 U.S.C. §."

Accordingly the Attorney General's Office is ordered to file an answer to Taylor's
Petition complying with Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States
District Courts on or before September 30, 2015. In addition, because Taylor has had a Motion
for Attorney Representation that had been hanging fire
while the complex issue of limitations was being explored, this Court grants that motion (Dkt.
No. 4) and, in accordance with the practice regularly employed in this District in such Section
2254 cases, appoints the Federal Defender Program to provide Taylor with legal representation
by designating one of its staff attorneys or a member of its attorney panel to act as his pro bono
counsel.

__________________________________________
Milton I. Shadur
Senior United States District Judge
Date: August 4, 2015

-2-