White
White v. Schriro
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
Arizona state prisoner Charles Edward White, Jr. appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.
‘We review the dismissal of a habeas petition on statute of limitations grounds de novo.” Herbst v. Cook, 260 F.3d 1039, 1042 (9th Cir.2001). The one-year statute of limitations for the filing of a federal habeas petition is statutorily tolled while “a properly filed application for State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect to the pertinent judgment or claim is pending....” 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(2). The district court did not err in determining that White’s first petition for post-conviction relief ceased to be pending on June 15, 2000. Neither of the two cases relied on by White, State v. Jones, 182 Ariz. 432 , 897 P.2d 734 (1995), and State v. Pruett, 185 Ariz. 128 , 912 P.2d 1357 (1995), support his contention that an Arizona post-conviction proceeding remains pending until the court of appeals issues a mandate.
The district court also did not err in determining that White was not entitled to equitable tolling. “If the facts underlying a…