Case Name: Granval G. HUNTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Matthew KRAMER, Warden; et al., Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-06-15
Citations: 384 F. App'x 555
Docket Number: No. 08-16791
Parties: Granval G. HUNTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Matthew KRAMER, Warden; et al., Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 384
Pages: 555–555

Head Matter:
Granval G. HUNTER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Matthew KRAMER, Warden; et al., Respondents-Appellees.
No. 08-16791.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 25, 2010.
Filed June 15, 2010.
Granval G. Hunter, Folsom, CA, pro se.
Brian R. Means, Deputy Attorney General, United States Department of Justice, Sacramento, CA, Brian G. Smiley, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, AGCA-Office of the California Attorney General, Sacramento, CA, for Respondents-Appel-lees.
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Granval G. Hunter appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Hunter contends that his time-barred habeas petition should be addressed on the merits because he is actually innocent of the conduct used to enhance his sentence. Because Hunter has failed to present any evidence of his innocence, the district court did not err by dismissing his petition. See Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298, 316-17, 115 S.Ct. 851, 130 L.Ed.2d 808 (1995).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.