Rene Joseph Delhomme v. Ana M. Ramirez, Warden

Bad Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 9241·340 F.3d 817·2003 WL 21947183·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7361·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 16724
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 15, 200300-56148California1,944 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rene Delhomme challenged his conviction and sentence by filing three habeas petitions in California courts in ascending order. While they were pending, Delhom-me filed additional and overlapping state habeas petitions. His federal habeas petition was later dismissed as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1). Since we find that the subsequent overlapping petitions did not affect the pendency of his first round of state collateral review, but began entirely separate rounds of review, Delhomme is entitled to tolling of the 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1) one-year statute of limitations during the entirety of his first round of review. Thus, his federal petition was timely.

I. Background

Rene Delhomme challenges the dismissal of his federal habeas petition, claiming he is entitled to equitable and statutory tolling of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”) one-year statute of limitation for filing a federal habeas petition. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1).

In 1997, Delhomme pled no contest to first-degree residential burglary and was sentenced under the “Three Strikes Law” to 11 years in prison. The district court found that his conviction became final…

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.