Garza

MEMORANDUM ***

California state prisoner Roman Guana Garza appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 and 2253, and we vacate and remand for further proceedings.

The State suggests that we do not have jurisdiction because Garza did not timely file his notice of appeal. We disagree because the sworn affidavit attached to the notice of appeal indicates that the notice was placed in a postage-paid envelope and deposited in the prison mail system on the thirtieth day following entry of judgment. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 4(c); Davis v. Woodford, 446 F.3d 957, 960 (9th Cir. 2006).

In his § 2254 petition, Garza’s only claim was one of juror bias. The district court denied Garza’s request for an evidentiary hearing on this claim. We conclude this denial was improper because Garza did not “fail[ ] to develop the factual basis of [his] *689 claim in State court proceedings.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (e)(2).

The record indicates that Garza “made a reasonable attempt, in light of the information available at the time, to investigate and pursue” his claim of juror bias in state court. See…