Wallace

Wallace v. Ayers

Good Law
32 F. App'x 481
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 15, 2002No. 00-55884; D.C. No. CV-98-02090-WDKCalifornia260 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Nathaniel Deon Wallace appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition, challenging his robbery and attempted murder convictions. The district court dismissed Wallace’s petition as time-barred under AEDPA’s one-year statute of limitations. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo the district court’s decision to deny a habeas petition, Wade v. Terhune, 202 F.3d 1190, 1194 (9th Cir.2000), and we vacate and remand.

The basis of the district court’s decision, which was made without the benefit of our recent decision in Bunney v. Mitchell, is erroneous. See Bunney v. Mitchell, 262 F.3d 973, 974 (9th Cir.2001) (per curiam) (concluding that under California Rule of Court 24, the supreme court’s denial of a habeas petition becomes final 30 days after entry of the order). The record is not sufficiently developed for us to determine whether Wallace is otherwise entitled to statutory tolling under § 2244(d)(2) such that his federal petition is timely. We therefore vacate the district court’s decision and remand. The district court is directed to…

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.