Martin

MEMORANDUM **

Martin’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus was properly dismissed as untimely. It was filed 754 days after the time limit prescribed by AEDPA had expired. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1).

We reject Martin’s argument that his deadline should be equitably tolled because of “constant” prison lockdowns. Equitable tolling applies if there are “extraordinary circumstances beyond a prisoner’s control [that] make it impossible to file a petition on time.” Calderon v. U.S. District Court (Beeler), 128 F.3d 1283, 1288 (9th Cir.1997) (internal quotation marks omitted). The petition must still be dismissed, however, if it would be late even after tolling were taken into account. See Green v. White, 223 F.3d 1001, 1002-03 (9th Cir.2000). Martin offered memos showing that the prison was locked down for a total of 510 days. In addition, his state petitions were pending for 172 days. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(2); Bunney v. Mitchell, 262 F.3d 973 (9th Cir.2001). The maximum conceivable number of days of tolling to which he would be entitled (682) thus still falls short of 754.

We are not persuaded by Martin’s claims that his collection of lockdown memos “no doubt remains an…