Frank
United States v. Frank
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
In this consolidated appeal, William J. Frank appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his motion for equitable tolling to file a late 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, and the denial of his motion for production of transcripts in order to file a different § 2255 motion. Frank seeks to challenge his guilty plea conviction for one count of continuing criminal enterprise, one count of money laundering and one count of tax evasion, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 848 , 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (a)(1)(B)(i) and 26 U.S.C. § 7201 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . Since the relevant facts are not in dispute, we review de novo the issue of equitable tolling, Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999), and we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
*661 Equitable tolling of the AEDPA’s statute of limitations is appropriate only if extraordinary circumstances beyond a prisoner’s control make it impossible to file a petition on time. Calderon v. United States District Court for the Central District of California, 163 F.3d 530, 541 (9th Cir.1998) (Kelly). Frank states that his health condition and his appointed counsels’ failure to file his § 2255 motion…