Frank Michael Perea v. Paula Soelle;

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANK MICHAEL PEREA,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
PAULA SOELLE; et al.,
Respondents - Appellees.
No. 08-16527
D.C. No. 2:07-cv-02028-ROS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
Roslyn O. Silver, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Former Arizona state prisoner Frank Michael Perea appeals pro se from the
district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as
untimely. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
FILED
APR 15 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-16527 2
Perea contends he is entitled to equitable tolling because an assistant federal
public defender, not representing him, provided an outdated courthouse mailing
address that caused him to file his habeas petition late. We agree with the district
court that Perea has not demonstrated that an extraordinary circumstance beyond
his control prevented him from timely filing his habeas petition, or that he has been
pursuing his rights diligently. See Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408, 418 (2005);
see also Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1068 (9th Cir. 2002).
We construe Perea’s additional arguments 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 of 2 --