Antonio Orpiada v. E. McDaniel

Good Law
750 F.3d 1086·2014 WL 1797682·2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 8580
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 7, 201412-17131California1,712 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKEOWN, J.

This case raises the familiar question of whether a prisoner timely filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in federal court. For Antonio Orpiada, an inmate in Nevada State prison, the answer hinges on whether the prison mailbox rule applies to the filing of his state habeas corpus petition for the purpose of triggering statutory tolling of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) limitations period. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(2) (1996). If the mailbox rale does apply, as Orpiada asserts, his state petition is deemed filed on the date he delivered the petition to prison officials for mailing. See Saffold v. Newland, 250 F.3d 1262, 1268 (2000), vacated on other grounds, 536 U.S. 214 , 122 S.Ct. 2134 , 153 L.Ed.2d 260 (2002). If, however, the rule does not apply, the tolling period began on the date the state court clerk received Orpiada’s state petition, and the filing of the federal petition exceeds the one-year limitations period by three days. See Artuz v. Bennett, 531 U.S. 4, 8-9 , 121 S.Ct. 361 , 148 L.Ed.2d 213 (2000).

The combination of Supreme Court and Nevada precedent offers no wiggle room on the answer. We are bound by the Supreme Court’s…

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.