Rivera

United States v. Rivera

Good Law
221 F. App'x 601
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 23, 2007No. 05-16827California309 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Leonel Rivera appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging the 360-month sentence imposed following his convictions for conspiracy and possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 846. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Because Rivera did not file his section 2255 motion until almost three years after the date his conviction became final, the district court properly denied the motion as untimely. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ; see also United States v. Schwartz, 274 F.3d 1220, 1222-23 (9th Cir.2001). Although Rivera contends that the limitations period should be equitably tolled due to his limited knowledge of English and the lack of Spanish-language materials in the prison law library, this contention is waived because Rivera did not raise it in district court. See Allen v. Ornoski, 435 F.3d 946, 960 (9th Cir.2006). The district court properly rejected his contention that the limitations period began on the date the Supreme Court decided United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). See United States v.…

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.