Alvarez v. Schriro
This text of 286 F. App'x 474 (Alvarez v. Schriro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Arizona state prisoner Nicholas Quinte-ro Alvarez appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 as untimely and procedurally barred. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Alvarez fails to show cause for the default of his federal claim in state court, therefore federal habeas review of the claim is barred. See Thomas v. Lewis, 945 F.2d 1119, 1123 (9th Cir.1991).
Even if Alvarez’s claim were not procedurally barred, his contention that he is entitled to equitable tolling of the Antiter-rorism and Effective Death Penalty Act’s one-year statute of limitations would fail as he cannot demonstrate extraordinary circumstances sufficient to justify equitable tolling. See Allen v. Lewis, 255 F.3d 798, 799-801 (9th Cir.2001) (per curiam).
Alvarez’s motion to expand the certificate of appealability is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 22-1(e); see also Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
286 F. App'x 474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alvarez-v-schriro-ca9-2008.