Fain

MEMORANDUM **

Wanda Fain, a California state prisoner, appeals the district court’s dismissal of her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as time-barred. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We review de novo, see Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999), and we affirm.

Post-conviction counsel’s miscalculation of Fain’s statute of limitations deadline is not enough to warrant equitable tolling. See Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1067-68 (9th Cir.) (rejecting claim of equitable tolling despite counsel’s mistaken advice about AEDPA deadline), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1003 , 123 S.Ct. 496 , 154 L.Ed.2d 399 (2002); see also Frye v. Hickman, 273 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir.2001) (denying equitable tolling based on counsel’s negligence), ce rt. denied, 535 U.S. 1055 , 122 S.Ct. 1913 , 152 L.Ed.2d 823 (2002).

Further, being pro se is not an extraordinary circumstance for habeas petitioners, and is not a basis for equitable tolling. Cf. Corjasso v. Ayers, 278 F.3d 874, 877-78 (9th Cir.2002) (approving equitable tolling only upon showing of extraordinary circumstances beyond prisoner’s control).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be…