David R. Stobaugh v. Tana Wood

50 F.3d 16 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. David R. STOBAUGH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Tana WOOD, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-36028. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 21, 1995. * Decided March 23, 1995. Before: SNEED, POOLE and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 David R. Stobaugh appeals the district court's denial of his motion for reconsideration. Stobaugh contends that the district court mistakenly ruled that he failed to file a timely notice of appeal from the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 , and we reverse and remand. A. BACKGROUND 3 On December 9, 1992, Stobaugh filed a habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 . On September 7, 1993, the district court dismissed Stobaugh's petition. On November 4, 1993, after receiving and reviewing the district court's docket information, Stobaugh became aware of the order denying his…