Charles Norman, Jr. v. John Dovey

Good Law
486 F. App'x 651
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 17, 201212-15615California237 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Charles Glenn Norman, Jr., appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Norman does not dispute on appeal the district court’s determination that his petition was untimely. Even if this issue were not waived by Norman’s failure to brief it, see Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir.1999), the record supports the district court’s conclusion. Norman’s petition was filed beyond AEDPA’s limitations period, and he is not entitled to either equitable or statutory tolling. See Holland v. Florida, — U.S. —, 130 S.Ct. 2549, 2562 , 177 L.Ed.2d 130 (2010) (equitable tolling available where the petitioner shows “(1) that he has been pursuing his rights diligently, and (2) that some extraordinary circumstance stood in his way and prevented timely filing”) (internal quotations omitted); Ferguson v. Palmateer, 321 F.3d 820, 823 (9th Cir.2003) (“section 2244(d) does not permit the reinitiation of the limitations period that has ended before the state petition was filed”).

We construe Norman’s additional arguments as a motion…

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.