Wilfredo Rodriguez v. T. Cisneros

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California dismissed Wilfredo Rodriguez’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition with prejudice as untimely. The court held that statutory and equitable tolling did not render the petition timely and denied a certificate of appealability.

Holdings

1. The petition was untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A). The conviction became final on May 11, 2021, the limitations period began on May 12, 2021, and statutory tolling for the state habeas petition left a filing deadline of June 21, 2022. Because Rodriguez filed on September 6, 2022, the petition was 77 days late.
2. Rodriguez was not entitled to equitable tolling because he failed to establish both reasonable diligence and an extraordinary circumstance that actually caused the untimely filing.
3. Because the petition was facially untimely and equitable tolling was unavailable, Rule 4 required summary dismissal with prejudice. A certificate of appealability was denied.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the § 2254 petition was untimely under the one-year limitations period in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(A), accounting for statutory tolling under § 2244(d)(2).
2. Whether Rodriguez was entitled to equitable tolling based on his placement in segregated housing, restricted law-library access, mistake in filing a state habeas petition, pro se status, or legal ignorance.
3. Whether the petition should be summarily dismissed under Rule 4 and whether a certificate of appealability should issue.

Disposition

dismissed