Robert Jerome Espinoza-Matthews v. People of the State of California, Attorney General

Good Law
432 F.3d 1021·2005 WL 3535129·2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 28784
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 28, 200504-56805California2,970 words

Opinion

Opinion

Shadur, J.

Robert Jerome Espinoza-Matthews (“Espinoza-Matthews”) appeals the district court’s determination that his petition for a writ of habeas corpus was barred by the one-year statute of limitations set out in 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d). Espinoza-Matthews claims that the statute of limitations governing his habeas petition (1) should be equitably tolled both because he was denied access' to his legal materials while housed in Administrative Segregation (“Ad/Seg”) and because of his mental health problems and (2) should be statutorily tolled because of the deprivation of legal materials.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to Sections 1291 and 2253. Because we hold that Espinoza-Matthews is entitled to equitable tolling, we reverse the district court’s determination that his habeas petition was untimely and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. And because statutory tolling would necessarily rest on a constitutional ground, one that need not be addressed to arrive at our equitable tolling decision, we refrain from deciding whether the same destination can be reached by the application of statutory tolling principles (see Lott v. Mueller, 304 F.3d 918, 925 (9th…

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.