Noel Phillipe Scott v. Tom L. Carey

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
NOEL PHILLIPE SCOTT,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
TOM L. CAREY,
Respondent - Appellee.
No. 09-15349
D.C. No. 2:07-cv-01001-WBS-
KJM
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 15, 2011**
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Noel Phillipe Scott appeals pro se 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
FEB 23 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-15349 2
Scott contends that he is entitled to equitable tolling due to withholding of
legal papers, prison lockdowns, and limited library access. Equitable tolling is not
warranted because he has not shown that any of the above grounds caused the
untimely filing of his federal habeas petition. See Ramirez v. Yates, 571 F.3d 993,
998 (9th Cir. 2009); see also Allen v. Lewis, 255 F.3d 798, 800 (9th Cir. 2001)
(extraordinary circumstances encountered early on it will normally make it more
difficult to demonstrate causation).
We construe appellant’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 --