Case Name: Michael HUMPHREY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ken CLARK, Warden, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-12-19
Citations: 501 F. App'x 640
Docket Number: No. 10-55248
Parties: Michael HUMPHREY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ken CLARK, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before: PREGERSON, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 501
Pages: 640–640

Head Matter:
Michael HUMPHREY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Ken CLARK, Warden, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 10-55248.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Dec. 3, 2012.
Filed Dec. 19, 2012.
Michael Humphrey, Soledad, CA, pro se.
Office of the California Attorney General, Los Angeles, CA, for Respondent>-Ap-pellee.
Before: PREGERSON, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Petitioner-Appellant Michael Humphrey appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 2253. Humphrey argues that he is entitled to equitable tolling of the one-year AEDPA statute of limitations on the basis of his limited mental capacity. After the district court entered judgment in this case, we decided Bills v. Clark, 628 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir.2010), which provides a framework for determining whether a ha-beas petitioner is entitled to equitable tolling of the statute of limitations on the basis of a mental impairment. Because the district court did not have the benefit of our decision in Bills, we vacate the judgment and remand to the district court for reconsideration under the Bills framework.
VACATED and REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.