Milligan

Milligan v. Scribner

Good Law
220 F. App'x 746
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 21, 2007No. 05-55820California457 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The district court correctly concluded that the Shandel Clay Milligan’s habeas petition was untimely. Equitable tolling based on Milligan’s claim of inadequate library resources at High Desert State Prison was not justified. Although we have previously said that deficient prison library resources may be grounds for equitable tolling, the inquiry is “highly fact-dependent.” See Whalem/Hunt v. Early, 233 F.3d 1146, 1148 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc). The evidence presented shows no causal link between the library’s limitations and the year delay in Milligan’s petition. The district court properly concluded that Milligan’s “vague and unsubstantiated assertion does not warrant [equitable] tolling.”

Although equitable tolling may be justified where a prisoner is deprived of access to his files, see Lott v. Mueller, 304 F.3d 918 (9th Cir.2002), such basis for tolling cannot redeem Milligan’s petition. For even if we were to accept his unsubstantiated assertion that his files were removed for numerous weeks during each prison transfer, it would be insufficient to account for the enormous delay in filing here.

*748 Statutory tolling cannot make up the deficit. Under the…

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.