Samuel Bonner v. Terri Gonzalez

Good Law
526 F. App'x 759
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 16, 201310-55237California610 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Samuel Quinton Bonner appeals the district court’s order dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The district court dismissed his petition as untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (d) after holding that he was not entitled to equitable tolling. We affirm.

Because Bonner had until April 24, 1997 to file a federal habeas petition under § 2244(d), but filed his petition on September 24,1998, his petition is untimely unless it is tolled pursuant to § 2244(d)(2) (tolling the one-year limitations period for the time in which a properly filed application for postconviction relief is pending in state court), or under the equitable tolling doctrine. We have previously determined that Bonner is not entitled to statutory tolling. Bonner v. Carey, 425 F.3d 1145, 1149 (9th Cir.2005). Today, we hold that he is not entitled to equitable tolling because he has not pursued his rights with reasonable diligence. Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631 , 130 S.Ct. 2549, 2562 , 177 L.Ed.2d 130 (2010) (holding that a petitioner is entitled to equitable tolling “only if he shows (1) that he has been pursuing his rights diligently, and (2) that some extraordinary circumstance stood in his…

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.