From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Maxwell v. Kramer

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Mar 2, 2010
368 F. App'x 791 (9th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 08-15831.

Submitted February 16, 2010.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.App.P. 34(a)(2).

Filed March 2, 2010.

Donny E. Maxwell, Represa, CA, pro se.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Oliver W. Wanger, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. 1:07-CV-00548-OWW.

Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.



MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

California state prisoner Donny E. Maxwell appeals from the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely, and we vacate and remand.

On appeal, respondents concede that Maxwell's petition was timely. From the record, it is apparent that Maxwell was entitled to tolling between June 5, 2006, and February 7, 2007, while his state habeas petitions were pending. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2); see also Evans v. Chavis, 546 U.S. 189, 191, 126 S.Ct. 846, 163 L.Ed.2d 684 (2006). Accordingly, his petition was timely. We vacate the dismissal and remand to the district court for consideration of the merits of Maxwell's petition. Maxwell's request to strike the supplemental excerpts of record is denied as moot.

VACATED AND REMANDED.


Summaries of

Maxwell v. Kramer

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Mar 2, 2010
368 F. App'x 791 (9th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

Maxwell v. Kramer

Case Details

Full title:Donny E. MAXWELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. M.C. KRAMER; Attorney General…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Mar 2, 2010

Citations

368 F. App'x 791 (9th Cir. 2010)