Phallon Harris v. Anthony Hedgpeth , 389 F. App'x 645 ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 23 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PHALLON LEON HARRIS, No. 08-17745
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:07-cv-00212-JAM
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ANTHONY HEDGPETH,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted June 29, 2010 **
Before: ALARCÓN, LEAVY, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Phallon Leon Harris appeals pro se from the district
court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as untimely. We
have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Harris contends that he is entitled to statutory or equitable tolling because a
series of lockdowns impeded his access to the prison law library. This contention
fails because Harris has not demonstrated that an impediment or extraordinary
circumstance prevented him from timely filing his habeas petition, or that he
diligently pursued his rights. See Ramirez v. Yates, 571 F.3d 993, 998 (9th Cir.
2009); see also Bryant v. Schriro, 499 F.3d 1056, 1060 (9th Cir. 2007). Harris’
contention that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of tolling also
fails. See Tapia v. Roe, 189 F.3d 1052, 1058 (9th Cir. 1999).
We construe Harris’ briefing of uncertified issues as a motion to expand the
certificate of appealability. So construed, the motion is denied. See 9th Cir. R.
22-1(e); see also Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (per
curiam).
AFFIRMED.
2 08-17745