Case Name: Wallace ERVIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John MARSHALL; et al., Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-05-27
Citations: 279 F. App'x 571
Docket Number: No. 07-16145
Parties: Wallace ERVIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John MARSHALL; et al., Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before: PREGERSON, TASHIMA, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 279
Pages: 571–572

Head Matter:
Wallace ERVIN, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John MARSHALL; et al., Respondents-Appellees.
No. 07-16145.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 20, 2008.
Filed May 27, 2008.
Wallace Ervin, San Luis Obispo, CA, pro se.
Pamela B. Hooley, Esq., Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Respondents-Appellees.
Before: PREGERSON, TASHIMA, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Wallace Ervin appeals pro se from the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Ervin contends he is entitled to statutory tolling of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act's one-year statute of limitations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2). However, because the Cali fornia Superior Court rejected Ervin's habeas petition as untimely, it was not "properly filed," and he is not entitled to statutory tolling under § 2244(d)(2). See Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 417, 125 S.Ct. 1807, 161 L.Ed.2d 669 (2005).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.