Dawkins

Dawkins v. Castro

Good Law
63 F. App'x 397
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 2003No. 01-17132; D.C. No. CV-00-00947-WBSCalifornia290 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Douglas Lee Dawkins appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his jury convictions for two counts of assault with a deadly weapon by a prisoner in violation of CaLPenal Code § 4501, and two counts of possession of a sharp instrument by a prisoner in violation of Cal.Penal Code § 4502(a). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo a district court’s decision to dismiss a petition for habeas corpus, see Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999), and we vacate and remand.

At the time the district court dismissed Dawkins’s petition, it did not have the benefit of our decision in Ford v. Hubbard, 305 F.3d 875, 885 (9th Cir.2002) (concluding that the district court erred when it failed to inform a pro se petitioner he would be time barred upon returning to federal court with exhausted claims). Accordingly, we vacate and remand.

On remand, the district court should examine whether Dawkins exercised reasonable diligence in exhausting his claims, see Guillory v. Roe, 329 F.3d 1015 , No. 01-56343, 2003 WL 2013086 (9th Cir. May 5, 2003) (holding…

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.