Alonzo

Alonzo v. Pliler

Good Law
53 F. App'x 854
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 7, 2003No. 01-55673; D.C. No. CV-00-05618-CASCalifornia580 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*855 MEMORANDUM *

Freddy Alonzo, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s denial of his habeas petition as time-barred under the one-year statute of limitations of the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1). The district court denied Alonzo’s petition, adopting the magistrate’s report without addressing Alonzo’s claim that the limitations period should be equitably tolled because prison guards beat him and destroyed his eyeglasses, rendering him unable to read or write for nearly two years. We granted a certificate of appealability on the following issue:

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and hold that the answer to this question is yes.

Equitable tolling applies when: 1) extraordinary circumstances beyond the plaintiffs control make it impossible to file a claim on time; or when 2) the plaintiff is prevented from asserting the claim by wrongful conduct on the part of the defendant. See Alvarez-Machain v. United States, 107 F.3d 696, 701 (9th Cir.1996). Where “adseg staff” beat a prisoner, break his glasses, render him unable to read and write, and fail for two years to provide him with replacement glasses,…

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.