Hachmeister v. Williams

Background Mr. Hachmeister was convicted in state court of first-degree murder. His conviction was affirmed on June 5, 2020, and he did not seek certiorari. The federal district court dismissed his Section 2254 petition as untimely and declined to alter or amend the judgment. He then sought a certificate of appealability from the Tenth Circuit. The court’s reasoning The court explained that a certificate of appealability could issue only if the district court’s timeliness ruling was reasonably debatable. Applying the federal one-year limitations period for Section 2254 petitions, the court said the conviction became final when the time to seek certiorari expired, making the federal deadline November 3, 2021. Because Mr. Hachmeister did not seek federal habeas relief until May 29, 2025, the petition was untimely. The court rejected statutory tolling because his state post-conviction action was not filed until more than a year after finality, after the federal limitations period had already expired. It also rejected reliance on a Kansas Supreme Court administrative order suspending certain state limitations periods, explaining that Section 2244(d) is an independent federal rule and that the state order did not extend the federal one-year deadline. On equitable tolling, the court held that Mr. Hachmeister had not shown extraordinary circumstances beyond his control that prevented timely filing, and his asserted misunderstanding that he had to pursue state post-conviction relief first did not qualify. Because Mr. Hachmeister’s appellate arguments aren’t reasonably debatable, we deny his request for a certificate of appealability. Absent a certificate of appealability, we dismiss the matter. Order at 4 What it means going forward The appeal is over because the petitioner did not obtain a certificate of appealability. The district court’s dismissal of the Section 2254 petition as untimely remains in place, although the court granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.