(HC) McCoy v. Soto
1:15-cv-01578
E.D. Cal.Jun 20, 2017Background
- Petitioner Anthony McCoy, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition; Respondent moved to dismiss as time-barred under AEDPA’s one-year limitation.
- The Magistrate Judge initially recommended dismissal; after McCoy asserted equitable tolling, the Magistrate reopened the record and ordered evidence on tolling.
- Respondent submitted evidence showing McCoy’s legal property was returned January 18, 2015; McCoy later filed a sworn declaration saying his legal materials were not returned and that prison officials failed to respond to four appeals.
- McCoy contends placement in administrative segregation and deprivation of legal materials and access to law library (Dec 29, 2014–June 26, 2015) created a state impediment and warrants equitable tolling under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(B).
- The Magistrate issued a March 29, 2017 findings and recommendation again urging dismissal; McCoy filed objections and the district court conducted a de novo review.
- The district court declined to adopt the March 29 recommendation, denied Respondent’s motion to dismiss without prejudice to renewal after merits resolution, found McCoy’s allegations could support equitable tolling, and remanded to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings (including possible factual development/hearing).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether AEDPA limitation period began later under § 2244(d)(1)(B) due to state-created impediment | McCoy: segregation and confiscation of legal materials prevented timely filing, so clock starts when impediment removed | Respondent: petitioner filed late; property records show legal materials returned Jan 18, 2015 | Court accepted McCoy’s allegations as raising a plausible § 2244(d)(1)(B) claim requiring further development |
| Whether equitable tolling applies | McCoy: exercised diligence (filed appeals, requested materials) and extraordinary circumstances (deprivation of legal materials, lack of library access) prevented timely filing | Respondent: denies deprivation; points to property return record and that petitioner did not timely produce evidence | Court found McCoy’s sworn allegations sufficient to warrant further factual development and possible evidentiary hearing on equitable tolling |
| Adequacy of record to resolve statute-of-limitations defense on existing papers | McCoy: produced a declaration and asserted prison nonresponse to appeals | Respondent: submitted property slip showing return; did not respond to later objections | Court held record is not settled; Ninth Circuit precedent supports further factual development and hearing when petitioner makes good-faith tolling allegations |
| Whether to resolve procedural timeliness before merits | Respondent: move to dismiss as untimely should be resolved first | McCoy: disputes timeliness via tolling claims; seeks merits adjudication | Court exercised discretion to preserve judicial economy, denied dismissal without prejudice, and referred matter back for merits/procedural development |
Key Cases Cited
- Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631 (2010) (equitable tolling requires diligence and extraordinary circumstances)
- Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408 (2005) (equitable tolling framework cited)
- Waldron-Ramsey v. Pacholke, 556 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir. 2009) (deprivation of legal materials can constitute an external impediment warranting equitable tolling)
- Orthel v. Yates, 795 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2015) (when tolling allegations are credible, further factual development or hearing may be required)
- Roy v. Lampert, 465 F.3d 964 (9th Cir. 2006) (habeas petitioner entitled to evidentiary hearing on tolling where good-faith allegations, if true, would entitle petitioner to tolling)