Court Opinion

ID: 9495223
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 15:57:39.035851+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:56:53.767722
License: Public Domain

BERZON, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent from this Order. Even on the theory relied upon by the majority in its opinion in this case, it decidedly does matter under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2)”whether the unique appellate review provisions that apply to Guam, see 48 U.S.C. § 1424-2, create ‘state’ or ‘federal’ exhaustion procedures.”
Section 2244(d)(2) tolls the limitations period while “a properly filed application for State post-conviction or other collateral review is pending.” I continue to believe, as stated in my dissent from the majority opinion, that an application filed in state court is still pending while on a petition for certiorari, whether in this court or the United States Supreme Court. But, even if one does not agree with this premise, it is beyond dispute that the statute tolls the limitations period while state proceedings are still ongoing. So, if the unique procedures applicable to Guam make the certio-rari proceedings in this court analogous to state proceedings rather than analogous to United States Supreme Court certiorari proceedings — an issue on which I express no view, as we have had no briefing on the issue — then one would expect that time expended in pursuing Ninth Circuit certio-rari counts within the tolling period. On that ground as well I respectfully dissent.