Anderson

Anderson v. Hickman

Good Law
52 F. App'x 62
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 5, 2002No. 00-17263; D.C. No. CV-99-04125-MHPCalifornia281 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Ricky Mitchell Anderson appeals the dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . He argues that the district court erred in finding the petition untimely under the one-year statute of limitations imposed by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”), 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we reverse and remand.

After unsuccessfully appealing and seeking collateral relief from his conviction of second degree murder in the California state courts, Anderson petitioned for federal relief on December 13, 1994. On March 5, 1998, the district court dismissed Anderson’s petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, with leave to amend. The district court dismissed Anderson’s amended petition without prejudice on April 2, 1999 for failure to exhaust certain claims. Because Anderson was pro se and the district court failed to inform him that on the face of the complaint “he would be time-barred under AEDPA on all of his claims if he either failed to amend his petition[ ] or chose the option of dismissing [it] and returning to state court to exhaust the unexhausted claims,” the…

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.