Enver Karafili v. James Tilton
This text of 449 F. App'x 633 (Enver Karafili v. James Tilton) 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 **
Enver Karafili appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1). We affirm.
The district court did not err in finding that Karafili’s mental condition was not so severe that he was unable to file a timely federal petition. See Bills v. Clark, 628 F.3d 1092, 1099-1100 (9th Cir.2010). As for Karafili’s limited English skills, the record does not establish that he requested and was unable to obtain a translator or that it was his limited English skills that caused him to file an untimely federal petition. Cf. Mendoza v. Carey, 449 F.3d 1065, 1071 (9th Cir.2006). Equitable tolling was correctly denied.
We decline to certify the uncertified issues raised by Karafili.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 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
449 F. App'x 633, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/enver-karafili-v-james-tilton-ca9-2011.