Melvin Edwin v. Joseph Schmidt

Good Law
406 F. App'x 201
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 17, 201009-35231California447 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Melvin G. Edwin appeals the district court’s dismissal of his federal habeas corpus claim. The court did not reach the merits of Edwin’s petition; rather, it determined that the petition had not been brought within the one-year period of limitation required by 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (a), and we affirm.

The parties are familiar with the facts of the case so we do not repeat them here. Edwin has failed to demonstrate that he was eligible for either statutory or equitable tolling. Section 2244(d)(2) requires “a properly filed application” to toll the limitation period through the pendency of proceedings. See Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 414-15 , 125 S.Ct. 1807 , 161 L.Ed.2d 669 (2005). Edwin has not shown that he properly filed any application until June 15, 2000—more than three years after the period applicable to his federal claims began to run.

He also fails to show entitlement to equitable tolling because he has not satisfactorily shown that he took any action in regard to his claims from August 1, 1996, until October 1999. He then waited more than seven months to actually file his claim on June 15, 2000.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.