Strube

Strube v. Stewart

Good Law
68 F. App'x 118
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 20, 2003No. 02-15469California409 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Arizona state prisoner Stephen Kent Strube appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his Fed. Rule Civ. P. 60(b) motion for relief from the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as time-barred. Strube seeks to challenge his guilty-plea conviction for child molestation and sexual conduct with a minor. This court reviews for abuse of discretion a district court’s denial of a Rule 60(b) motion. Greenawalt v. Stewart, 105 F.3d 1268, 1273 (9th Cir.1997). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We vacate and remand.

Strube contends in his motion for reconsideration that the district court erred in dismissing his petition as time-barred because the petition is an amendment of his first timely-filed habeas petition.

At the time the district court denied Strube’s motion for reconsideration and dismissed his federal petition, the court did not have the benefit of our decisions in Ford v. Hubbard, 330 F.3d 1086, 1100 (9th Cir.2003) (as amended) (concluding that the district court erred when it failed to inform a pro se petitioner that he would be time-barred upon returning to federal court with exhausted claims), Kelly v. Small, 315 F.3d 1063,…

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.