Legal Opinion
Robert Jerome Espinoza-Matthews v. People of the State of California, Attorney General
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 28, 2005No. 04-56805PublishedCited by 137 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SHADUR, Senior District Judge.
Robert Jerome Espinoza-Matthews (“Espinoza-Matthews”) appeals the district court’s determination that his petition for a writ of habeas corpus was barred by the one-year statute of limitations set out in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). 1 Espinoza-Matthews claims that the statute of limitations governing his habeas petition (1) should be equitably tolled both because he was denied access' to his legal materials while housed in Administrative Segregation (“Ad/Seg”) and because of his mental health problems and (2) should be statutorily tolled because of the deprivation of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Pace v. DiGuglielmoSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Willie Lee Miles v. K.W. Prunty, Warden Attorney General of the State of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- United States v. Sean HowellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Sergey Spitsyn v. Robert Moore, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by137 opinions
- Jackie Ervin Rasberry v. Rosie B. Garcia, WardenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Armando Sossa v. Ralph M. DiazCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Ramirez v. YatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Harris v. CarterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- George Gibbs v. Robert LegrandCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
132 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.