Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00954/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-00954-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

John Palmer, 

Petitioner, 

vs.

Dora B. Schriro; et al., 

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 08-0954-PHX-JAT (ECV)

ORDER

Pending before this Court is Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Petition).

On March 11, 2009, the Magistrate Judge to whom this case was assigned issued a Report

and Recommendation (R&R) recommending that the Petition be dismissed because it is

barred by the statute of limitations. On March 20, 2009, Petitioner filed objections to the

R&R.

This Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or

recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). It is “clear that the

district judge must review the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendations de novo if

objection is made, but not otherwise.” United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121

(9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (emphasis in original). Because Petitioner filed objections, this

Court will review de novo the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion that the Petition in this case is

barred by the statute of limitations.

Case 2:08-cv-00954-JAT Document 17 Filed 06/11/09 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

On November 4, 1992, pursuant to a plea agreement in Maricopa County Superior

Court, Petitioner pled guilty to one count of child molestation, a class two felony under

Arizona law and one count of attempted child molestation, a class three felony. Doc. #13,

Exh. B, C. On December 2, 1992, Petitioner was sentenced to 17 years in prison on the first

count and a consecutive term of lifetime probation on the second account. Doc. #13, Exh. D,

E. In the case of criminal defendants who plead guilty and for purposes of § 2244(d), the

judgment of conviction becomes final upon the conclusion of an of-right proceeding pursuant

to Rule 32.4, Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, or upon the expiration of the time for

seeking such review. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A); Summers v. Schriro, 481 F.3d 710, 711 (9th

Cir. 2007). As Petitioner failed to file a petition pursuant to Rule 32.4 within the 90-day time

limit (before March 1, 1993), his judgment of conviction became final on March 2, 1993. 

As the R&R correctly recounts, under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty

Act of 1996 (AEDPA), Petitioner had until April 25, 1997, to file a petition for writ of habeas

corpus with this Court as he is a state prisoner whose conviction became final before April

24, 1996, the effective date of the AEDPA. R&R at 4; Patterson v. Stewart, 251 F.3d 1243,

1245 (9th Cir. 2001). Petitioner objects to this conclusion, Objection at 4-5, on the grounds

that the AEDPA only applies to cases filed after the AEDPA became effective, Lindh v.

Murphy, 521 U.S. 320, 323 (1997); Petitioner is mistaken, however, as to the case at issue.

Lindh refers to the filing date of a petition for writ of habeas corpus and not to the filing date

of the underlying criminal case. Id. In this case, Petitioner filed the Petition August 27, 2008,

after the AEDPA became effective. Therefore, the Petition is untimely unless Petitioner is

entitled to tolling of the statute of limitations until August 27, 2008.

By statute, Petitioner is entitled to “statutory” tolling during any period he had a

“properly filed application for State post-conviction or other collateral review with respect

to the pertinent judgment or claim ... pending.” 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2). In this case,

Petitioner failed to file an “of-right” petition for post-conviction relief within the 90-day time

limit after his conviction and sentencing, 17 A.R.S. Rules of Criminal Procedure 32.4 (1997),

Case 2:08-cv-00954-JAT Document 17 Filed 06/11/09 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

and is therefore not entitled to statutory tolling. R&R at 4. Petitioner did file a petition for

post-conviction relief on June 4, 2007, id. at 1; however, even if this petition were not

untimely, it would not restart the limitations period because the period ended before the

petition was filed. See id. at 4 (citing Ferguson v. Palmateer, 321 F.3d 820, 823 (9th Cir.

2003)). Therefore, after considering statutory tolling, the Petition is still untimely.

Next, the Court considers equitable tolling. See Lawrence v. Florida, 549 U.S. 327,

336 (2007) (assuming without deciding that equitable tolling is available to habeas

petitioners); see also Harris v. Carter, 515 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2008); accord Coker v.

Quarterman, No. 05-10020, 2008 WL 724042, at *5 n.1 (5th Cir. Mar. 17, 2008) (expressly

holding that equitable tolling of AEDPA’s statute of limitations is available); Diaz v. Kelly,

515 F.3d 149, 153 (2d Cir. 2008) (same). The Magistrate Judge concluded that Petitioner is

not entitled to equitable tolling. R&R at 5. Petitioner objects to this conclusion.

For Petitioner to be entitled to equitable tolling, he must show “‘(1) that he has been

pursuing his rights diligently, and (2) that some extraordinary circumstance stood in his way’

and prevented timely filing.” Lawrence, 549 U.S. at 336 (citing Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544

U.S. 408, 418 (2005)). 

Regarding the first requirement, Petitioner did not file this Petition until eleven years

after the designated time period ended. Petitioner fails to present any facts or argument to

show that, during those eleven years, he was pursuing his rights diligently. Therefore, the

Court finds Petitioner was not diligent.

Regarding the second requirement, Petitioner’s allegation that the State of Arizona

failed to provide notice of the limitations period imposed by the AEDPA fails because, as a

general proposition, the State has no duty to give him notice. Moreover, Petitioner does not

allege any facts that show why he could not timely file. Petitioner's general allegations

regarding his lack of familiarity with the law and lack of legal assistance alone do not

equitably toll the statute of limitations. Raspberry v. Garcia, 448 F.3d 1150, 1154 (9th Cir.

2006).

Case 2:08-cv-00954-JAT Document 17 Filed 06/11/09 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 4 -

Furthermore, Petitioner alleges that the Arizona Department of Corrections failed to

provide the revised Form 530 throughout the year of 2008. Objection at 8-9. The Court notes

that in some cases inadequate legal materials can be an “impediment” which justifies late

filing, or can form the basis for equitable tolling. See Whalem/Hunt v. Early, 233 F.3d 1146,

1148 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc). Whalem/Hunt does not, however, apply in this case because

Petitioner does not allege that the form was unavailable prior to or on April 25, 1997. Thus,

even if the form had been provided during the year of 2008, Petitioner’s Petition would still

be untimely. 

Finally, Petitioner’s general claim that the State exhibited “bias and prejudice” toward

convicts fails to allege any facts showing why he could not timely file the Petition. 

Thus, all of Petitioner’s claims for equitable tolling fail and the Petition in this case

will be dismissed because it is barred by the statute of limitations.

Based on the foregoing,

IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. #15) is accepted and

adopted, the Objections (Doc. #16) are overruled, the Petition is dismissed with prejudice

because it is barred by the statute of limitations and the Clerk of the Court shall enter

judgment accordingly.

DATED this 10th day of June, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-00954-JAT Document 17 Filed 06/11/09 Page 4 of 4