Randy Eric Fuller v. T. FELKER, Warden

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
RANDY ERIC FULLER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
T. FELKER, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 07-56473
D.C. No. CV-07-00547-R
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Manuel L. Real, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted August 10, 2010**
Before: HAWKINS, McKEOWN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Randy Eric Fuller appeals 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.
FILED
AUG 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

07-56473 2
Fuller contends that his federal petition was timely because he is entitled to
equitable tolling due to a prison lockdown, which inhibited his access to the prison
law library. This contention fails because Fuller’s lack of access to the law library,
per se, was not an extraordinary circumstance that might have caused the
untimeliness of his petition. See Ramirez v. Yates, 571 F.3d 993, 997-98 (9th Cir.
2009).
In the alternative, Fuller contends that he is entitled to an evidentiary
hearing. Fuller’s reliance on Whalem/Hunt v. Early, 233 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2000)
(en banc) is unavailing because, unlike Whalem/Hunt, even if Fuller’s allegations
are true, equitable tolling would not be warranted.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --