Giurbino

Taek Sang Yoon v. Giurbino

Good Law
213 F. App'x 557
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 18, 2006No. 05-55895California249 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Taek Sang Yoon appeals the dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We affirm.

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) imposes a one year limitations period for federal habeas petitions. 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(1). Even with equitable tolling, Yoon’s petition was untimely. Equitable tolling would have ended on February 28, 2000 when Yoon began to file state habeas petitions, for he clearly was capable of pursuing habeas relief as of then. See Gaston v. Palmer, 417 F.3d 1030, 1034-35 (9th Cir.2005), modified on other grounds by 447 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir.2006). However, the California courts deemed his state petitions untimely. This means that they were not “properly filed” for purposes of statutory tolling under 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d)(2). See Bonner v. Carey, 425 F.3d 1145, 1148-49 (9th Cir.2005) (holding that habeas petitions dismissed as untimely by state courts are not “properly filed” for purposes of AEDPA). Thus, Yoon’s 2003 federal petition was untimely regardless of equitable tolling. Given this, there was no reason for the district court to hold an evidentiary hearing. See Roy v. Lampert, 465 F.3d…

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.