Torlucci

MEMDRANDUM

Petitioner-Appellant Arthur Torlucci (hereinafter “petitioner”), a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s finding that his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition is time-barred by the statute of limitations created by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996’s (hereinafter “AEDPA”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 .

We review de novo a district court’s decision to dismiss a § 2254 habeas petition as untimely. Rasberry v. Garcia, 448 F.3d 1150, 1153 (9th Cir.2006); King v. Roe, 340 F.3d 821, 822 (9th Cir.2003). Findings of fact underlying a claim for tolling the limitation period are reviewed for clear error. Rasberry, 448 F.3d at 1153 .

Because the parties are well acquainted with the facts and procedural history of this ease, no further elaboration is necessary. For the reasons discussed below, we affirm.

I. Interval Tolling

We agree with the district court that petitioner is not entitled to interval tolling. Petitioner’s conviction became final on July 21, 1998. Absent tolling, the statute of limitations would have expired on July 21, 1999. Petitioner’s first filing was 331 days after his judgment became final, and…