Case Name: Bilal AHDOM, Petitioner-Appellant, v. George GALAZA, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2008-07-02
Citations: 284 F. App'x 458
Docket Number: No. 06-56447
Parties: Bilal AHDOM, Petitioner—Appellant, v. George GALAZA, Respondent— Appellee.
Judges: Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 284
Pages: 458–459

Head Matter:
Bilal AHDOM, Petitioner—Appellant, v. George GALAZA, Respondent— Appellee.
No. 06-56447.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 18, 2008 .
Filed July 2, 2008.
Arthur H. Weed, Santa Barbara, CA, for Petitioner-Appellant.
Bilal Ahdom, Delano, CA, pro se.
Kristine A. Gutierrez, Esq., AGCA—Office of the California Attorney General, San Diego, CA, for Respondent-Appellee.
Before: REINHARDT, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, 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 Bilal Ahdom appeals 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.
Ahdom 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 five-month delay between the filing of Ahdom's first and second state post-conviction petitions, and the five-month delay between the filing of Ahdom's second and third state post-conviction petitions, were each unreasonable, we conclude that he is not entitled to statutory tolling for these periods. See Evans v. Chavis, 546 U.S. 189, 200-01, 126 S.Ct. 846, 163 L.Ed.2d 684 (2006).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.