Cox v. Lampert
This text of 56 F. App'x 401 (Cox v. Lampert) 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
The motions filed by Petitioner were not “petitions” for post-conviction relief under Oregon law. See O.R.S. § 138.580. Consequently, the statutory tolling provision of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) was never triggered. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). Petitioner’s failure to file a timely habeas petition was due to circumstances entirely within his control. Accordingly, equitable tolling is not available to Cox. See Lott v. Mueller, 304 F.3d 918, 922 (9th Cir.2002).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
56 F. App'x 401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cox-v-lampert-ca9-2003.