Case ID: f-appx_120/html/0208-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Claudie L. TYLER, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Gail LEWIS, Warden; et al., Respondents—Appellees.
    No. 03-55928.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 10, 2005.
    
    Decided Feb. 1, 2005.
    Robison D. Harley, Jr., Esq., Santa Ana, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    Claudie L. Tyler, PVSP — Pleasant Valley State Prison Facility, Coalinga, CA, pro se.
    Richard T. Breen, AGCA — Office Of The California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
    
      Before: REINHARDT and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges, and WEINER, District Judge.
    
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
       The Honorable Charles R. Weiner, Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Petitioner-Appellant Claudie L. Tyler appeals the dismissal of his habeas petition as untimely. Tyler acknowledges that he did not file a fully exhausted petition before the one-year statute of limitations mandated by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 had lapsed, but he argues that the statute of limitations should be equitably tolled. The Supreme Court recently held that district courts are not required to advise a pro se petitioner before dismissing his mixed habeas petition. Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225, -, 124 S.Ct. 2441, 2447, 159 L.Ed.2d 338 (2004). Accordingly, Tyler’s argument is foreclosed.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.