Christopher Maes v. Frank Chavez

Good Law
792 F.3d 1132·2015 WL 4080847·2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11641
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 7, 201513-16523California1,913 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ponsor, J.

After his state court conviction became final on April 12, 2011, Petitioner Christopher Maes had one year to file any federal habeas corpus petition. 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d). Two days shy of one year, Maes filed a petition for habeas corpus in the state superior court. The period during which this “properly filed” state petition was “pending” was not counted against the year that Maes had to file his federal petition. Id. § 2244(d)(2). This uncounted period ended on May 7, 2012, when the Superior Court of Shasta County, California, denied his state habeas petition, leaving Maes two days to file for federal habeas relief. Because Maes waited until May 15, 2012, to file a federal petition, the district court dismissed it as untimely. Maes now appeals, arguing that he had at least sixty days after the denial of his state habeas petition to file for federal habeas relief. We disagree and affirm the district court’s decision to dismiss.

I.

The procedural background of this case may be succinctly summarized. On April 8, 2009, Christopher Maes was convicted by a jury in Shasta County, California, of failing to provide notice of a change of address as a registered sex offender. As…

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.