Guillen

Guillen v. Terhune

Good Law
14 F. App'x 865
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 19, 2001No. 00-56777; D.C. No. CV-00-198-RTCalifornia1,463 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioner Guillen appeals the district court’s order accepting and adopting the report and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that Guillen’s habeas corpus petition brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 be dismissed as time-barred, 1 and dismissing with prejudice the petition for habeas corpus. The district court’s denial, on statute-of-limitation grounds, of a petition for writ of habeas corpus is reviewed de novo. See Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir. 1999). This court also reviews de novo a district court’s decision on the issue of equitable tolling. 2 See id.

DISCUSSION

The AEDPA limitations period may be subject to equitable tolling if “ ‘extraordinary circumstances’ beyond a prisoner’s control make it impossible to file a petition on time.” Calderon v. United States District Court (Beeler), 128 F.3d 1283, 1288 (9th Cir.1997), quoted and rev’d on other grounds in Calderon v. United States District Court (Kelly), 163 F.3d 530, 541 (9th Cir.1998) (en banc). However, “equitable tolling is unavailable in most cases.” Miles, 187 F.3d at 1107 ; see also Beeler, 128 F.3d at 1289 (stating that the equitable tolling standard creates a…

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.