tand trial & that his course of conduct should have put the court on notice to raise the issue sua sponte, even if trial counsel failed to do so.Illinois v. Caffey, 2001 Ill. LEXIS 1426 (Ill 10/18/2001) (dissents) Relief denied on the question of: [a] inclusion of some hearsay remarks detrimental to appellant & the non inclusion of statements beneficial to the appellant;, [b] improper closing remarks , including race baiting; [c] ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to introduce certain exculpatory information; [d] exclusion of evidence suggesting innocence; [e] failure to render a witness-accomplice instruction; [f] sentencing forms; [g] sentencing instructions; [h] failure to present mitigation information through both ineffective assistance & restrictions place by the trial court; [i] proportionality of sentence & [j] constitutionality of Illinois's death penalty.Delayed Publication /Amended OpinionsNo cases notedOther Notable Cases(As reported byFindlaw, and other sources)Trenkler v. United States, No. 00-1657 (1st Cir 10/16/2001) The statute of limitations for a 28 USC 2255 motion begins to run upon the completion of a prisoner's direct appeal from the judgment of conviction, and there is no statutory basis for tolling the limitations period while the prisoner seeks post-conviction relief under F. R. Crim. Proc. 33.