Smith v. Luna
This text of 134 F. App'x 209 (Smith v. Luna) 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
Alaska state prisoner Ruple Marx Smith appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253.
Reviewing de novo, Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir.1999), we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.
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
134 F. App'x 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-luna-ca9-2005.