Battles

United States v. Battles

Good Law
18 F. App'x 495
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 28, 2001No. 00-15134; D.C. No. CR-96-00077-EJGCalifornia664 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Federal prisoner Brian Keith Battles appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his untimely 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, which challenged his convictions for possession with the intent to distribute crystal methamphetamine and aiding and abetting possession with the intent to distribute crystal methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 , and being an accessory after the fact, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and reverse and remand in part.

Battles contends his motion was not barred by the one year limitation of the AEDPA because the limitations period should start running from the date he received actual notice the Supreme Court’s denial of his certiorari petition. We review the district court’s dismissal of a section 2255 motion de novo. See United States v. Chacon-Palomares, 208 F.3d 1157, 1158 (9th Cir.2000); see also Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999) (reviewing de novo equitable-tolling issue in § 2254 petition).

Battles’ contention is without merit because a conviction has become final, for habeas purposes, when either the time to petition.for certiorari…

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.