Esquivel

Esquivel v. Runnels

Good Law
191 F. App'x 573
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 26, 2006No. 05-55639California369 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

California state prisoner Alex Jose Esquivel appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 as untimely. The only issue we have to decide in this appeal is whether Esquivel is entitled to equitable tolling of the statute of limitations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253. We review de novo, Laws v. *574 Lamarque, 351 F.3d 919, 922 (9th Cir.2003), and we affirm.

Esquivel contends that periods of lock-down within the prison and his alleged cognitive impairments or lack of legal knowledge constitute “extraordinary circumstances” that should justify equitable tolling. Yet Esquivel has not demonstrated how any of these conditions caused him to file an untimely habeas petition. See Gaston v. Palmer, 417 F.3d 1030, 1034 (9th Cir.2005) (requiring a “causal connection” between the alleged extraordinary circumstances and the failure to file a timely petition), modified on other grounds by 447 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir.2006). Esquivel conceded that even during periods of lock-down, he still had access to the prison law library at least once a month. Furthermore, Esquivel’s pro se filings in the district court, both…

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.