Maximilliano Cisneros v. Renee Baker; Nevada Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MAXIMILLIANO CISNEROS,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
RENEE BAKER; NEVADA ATTORNEY
GENERAL,
Respondents - Appellees.
No. 14-16839
D.C. No. 3:13-cv-00033-MMD-
VPC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Miranda M. Du, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2015**
San Francisco, California
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge and IKUTA and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
Cisneros appeals the district court’s determination that he was not entitled to
equitable tolling of the statute of limitations applicable to his federal habeas
petition, see 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d), and its dismissal of the petition. We affirm. The
FILED
NOV 19 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

district court did not err in concluding that Cisneros’s attorney’s miscalculation of
the filing deadline was the sort of garden variety negligence that does not entitle a
petitioner to equitable tolling. See Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631, 651–52
(2010); Miranda v. Castro, 292 F.3d 1063, 1067–68 (9th Cir. 2002); Frye v.
Hickman, 273 F.3d 1144, 1146 (9th Cir. 2001).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --