Johnathon Hamilton v. Derral Adams

MEMORANDUM

Johnathon Hamilton challenges the dismissal of his federal habeas petition as untimely. We affirm.

Hamilton concedes that 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1)(A) required him to file his federal habeas petition within one year of April 15, 2008, the date on which his conviction became final. He failed to do so and thus invoked statutory tolling for the period in which he sought post-conviction review before the California Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court. See § 2244(d)(2). Tolling, however, is only available to a prisoner who has “properly filed” his petition “in compliance with the applicable laws and rules governing filings in that state.” Bonner v. Carey, 425 F.3d 1145, 1148 (9th Cir.2005) (internal quotation marks omitted), amended by 439 F.3d 993 (9th Cir.2006). An untimely state petition is not “properly filed” and triggers no tolling. Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 414 , 125 S.Ct. 1807 , 161 L.Ed.2d 669 (2005).

Both the California Court of Appeal and the California Supreme Court summarily denied Hamilton’s state habeas petitions. The district court correctly interpreted those summary denials by “looking through” them to the reasoning of the California…