untimely claim in Illinois

1995In each case, the hearing was held beyond the 30 day period mandated by statute, and, in each case but one, the court concluded that the untimely hearing failed to comport with due process. ( People v. Schaefer, 154 Ill.2d at 261, 264 , 182 Ill.Dec. 26 , 609 N.E.2d 329 .) In the case involving defendant Jack Puckett, Puckett filed his petition and requested a hearing date from the clerk of the circuit court.

1995In each case, the hearing was held beyond the 30 day period mandated by statute, and, in each case but one, the court concluded that the untimely hearing failed to comport with due process. ( People v. Schaefer, 154 Ill.2d at 261, 264 , 182 Ill.Dec. 26 , 609 N.E.2d 329 .) In the case involving defendant Jack Puckett, Puckett filed his petition and requested a hearing date from the clerk of the circuit court.

2024Therefore, defendant has failed to establish error, and thus, he cannot establish plain error. ¶ 22 In the alternative, OSAD maintains that its own failure to include the issue in the motion for relief and defense counsel’s failure to object to the alleged untimely hearing constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. ¶ 23 “The United States and Illinois Constitutions guarantee criminal defendants the right to the effective assistance of counsel.” People v. Lewis, 2022 IL 126705, ¶ 44 (citing U.S. Const., amends.

2016In re Summary Suspension of Driver's License of Trainor, 156 Ill.

2013See also Clay, 189 Ill. 2d at 614 (declining to apply equitable tolling, fraudulent concealment, or the discovery rule to salvage an untimely claim of clergy sexual abuse); M.E.H. v. L.H., 177 Ill. 2d 207, 219 (1997) (declining to allow plaintiffs to pursue claims of child sexual abuse against their father when complaint was filed two years after discovering abuse and almost four years after expiration of the repose period, despite their claims of an ongoing investigation into the extent of the abuse). ¶ 63 Because I would have affirmed dismissal on the basis of equitable tolling, I would also

2013See also Clay, 189 Ill. 2d at 614 (declining to apply equitable tolling, fraudulent concealment, or the discovery rule to salvage an untimely claim of clergy sexual abuse); M.E.H. v. L.H., 177 Ill. 2d 207, 219 (1997) (declining to allow plaintiffs to pursue claims of child sexual abuse against their father when complaint was filed two years after discovering abuse and almost four years after expiration of the repose period, despite their claims of an ongoing investigation into the extent of the abuse). ¶ 63 Because I would have affirmed dismissal on the basis of equitable tolling, I would also

2013As a unanimous supreme court explained, a defendant elects to invoke the affirmative defense of an expired limitations period and the defendant alone is “responsible for that decision and its impact on the plaintiff’s ability to seek relief through the courts.” Doe A. v. Diocese of Dallas, 234 Ill. 2d 393, 413-14 (2009) (declining to extend the limitations period for an untimely claim of clergy sexual abuse).

2013“Our function, as a court of review, is simply to insure that the law is applied correctly.” Doe A., 234 Ill. 2d at 414 .

2013Weatherly v. Human Rights Comm’n, 338 Ill.