Ingle v. Matteucci

The “escape clause” exists to give a person extra time to file a petition for post-conviction relief in “extraordinary circumstances,” personal characteristics are not currently relevant to the escape clause.

Petitioner’s post-conviction relief claim was dismissed as untimely, it was over eight years late. He argued his allegations are sufficient to raise the “escape clause,” because his personal mental health circumstances made it so his claims “could not have reasonably been raised” any earlier. Generally, a petitioner for post-conviction relief must be filed within two years of the entry of judgment or the exhaustion of any appeals, unless the court finds grounds for relief could not have reasonably been raised, the “escape clause” exists to give a person extra time to file a petition in “extraordinary circumstances.” The escape clause is construed narrowly. Personal characteristics are not currently relevant to the escape clause. A person’s mental health is a type of personal characteristic and as such is not enough to trigger the escape clause. There is currently no precedent for a post-conviction court to consider the person characteristics of a petitioner in applying the escape clause. Affirmed.