CHRISTOPHER JAMES HEMWALL v. ADAM DOUGLAS, Warden - Articles

All Content

CHRISTOPHER JAMES HEMWALL v. ADAM DOUGLAS, Warden

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Jul 24, 2026

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Haralambos D. Mihas, SMITH MIHAS, Wyandotte, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Nicholas Johnson, OFFICE OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Haralambos D. Mihas, SMITH MIHAS, Wyandotte, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Nicholas Johnson, OFFICE OF THE MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lansing, Michigan, for Appellee.

Judge(s): THAPAR, BUSH, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. State prisoners who seek federal habeas relief generally must file their petitions within a year of the date that their state convictions become final. But prisoners who do not file on time may seek to equitably toll this statute of limitations if they prove that they acted diligently and that extraordinary circumstances caused the tardy filing.Here, Christopher Hemwall claims that he filed his habeas petition five months late because of the health difficulties of his attorney and his attorney’s child. But the district court rejected this claim because Hemwall failed to show that these health difficulties caused Hemwall to file his petition after the deadline. We agree. Even if we assume that the difficulties could qualify as extraordinary circumstances, Hemwall did not establish a causal connection between them and the late filing. We affirm.

Attachments: