Johnson v. Guirrino
Johnson v. Guirrino
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Dickey James Johnson appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition, which challenges his conviction and life sentence for first-degree murder and kidnaping. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(a). Reviewing de novo, Miles v. Prunty, 187 F.3d 1104, 1105 (9th Cir. 1999), we vacate and remand.
The district court dismissed the instant petition, Johnson’s second, as time-barred. Johnson contends this dismissal was erro
Second, Johnson contends that he is entitled to equitable tolling because the district court did not advise him of the federal statute of limitations when it granted his motion for voluntary dismissal of his first federal petition, which contained exhausted and unexhausted claims. Cf. Ford v. Hubbard, 330 F.3d 1086, 1102 (9th Cir. 2003) (concluding that a second petition relates back to a first petition when the district court improperly dismissed the first petition without explaining the prisoner’s options and the possible consequences). Because Ford was decided after the district court ruled in this case, we vacate the dismissal and remand for consideration of whether, in the circumstances of this case, Johnson’s petition is timely under Ford.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.