Ramirez

Ramirez v. Yates

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 10, 200907-15087California3,407 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

Ramirez was charged and convicted in a jury trial of resi- dential burglary. He was sentenced to fifty-years-to-life in state prison on the basis of his three prior convictions for first degree burglary, one prior conviction for attempted first degree burglary, one prior conviction for attempted second degree burglary, and one prior conviction for the sale of nar- cotics. Direct appeals were unsuccessful, and the state court judgment became final on May 21, 2002.

Absent any tolling, the limitations period for a timely fed- eral habeas corpus petition under the Antiterrorism and Effec- tive Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) would have expired on May 21, 2003. Ramirez filed his first federal habeas petition on June 16, 2004, or 391 days past the running of the un- tolled limitations period.

A range of dates are relevant to determining whether the limitations period was sufficiently tolled to render Ramirez’s petition timely. The time line is as follows:

• On April 4, 2002, Ramirez delivered his first post-conviction state habeas petition. The petition was filed on April 9, 2002.1 1 “Under the ‘mailbox rule,’ a pro se prisoner’s filing of a state habeas petition is…

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.