Anthony Joseph Majoy v. Ernest C. Roe, Warden

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 7741·296 F.3d 770·2002 WL 1477364·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6156·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 13912
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 11, 200200-56521California2,953 words

Opinion

Opinion

Trott, J.

Petitioner Majoy stands convicted in California state court of. (1) conspiracy to commit murder for financial gain, and (2) two counts of first degree murder for financial gain committed while lying in wait. His appeals and petitions for post-conviction relief in state court failed, and he is serving a life sentence in prison without parole. His petition in federal district court for a writ of habeas corpus, which is governed by the provisions of the Antiter-rorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. of 1996 (“AEDPA”), Pub.L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214, was dismissed with prejudice as untimely because it did not satisfy the applicable one-year statute of limitation. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d). The district court correctly determined that because Majoy filed a state habeas petition with the California Supreme Court on April 15, 1997, eight days before the one-year AED-PA limitation period, running from its enactment on April 24,1996, would expire, he had eight days after the conclusion of the state habeas proceedings to file a timely federal petition. The California Supreme Court denied his petition on August 27, 1997, .meaning that Majoy had to file his federal petition in early…

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.