Case ID: f-appx_393/html/0477-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Randy Eric FULLER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. T. FELKER, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 07-56473.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 10, 2010.
    
    Filed Aug. 26, 2010.
    Randy Eric Fuller, Calipatria, CA, pro se.
    Kyle Niki Shaffer, Deputy Attorney General, Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

California state prisoner Randy Eric Fuller appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Fuller contends that his federal petition was timely because he is entitled to equitable tolling due to a prison lockdown, which inhibited his access to the prison law library. This contention fails because Fuller’s lack of access to the law library, per se, was not an extraordinary circumstance that might have caused the untimeliness of his petition. See Ramirez v. Yates, 571 F.3d 993, 997-98 (9th Cir.2009).

In the alternative, Fuller contends that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing. Fuller’s reliance on Whalem/Hunt v. Early, 233 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc) is unavailing because, unlike Whalem/Hunt, even if Fuller’s allegations are true, equitable tolling would not be warranted.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.