Kamilah L. Dennis v. Kimberly Hughes, 2:15-cv-08186

Kamilah L. Dennis was convicted in Los Angeles County of second-degree murder with a weapon enhancement on September 7, 2011, and sentenced October 12, 2011 to 16 years to life.
The California Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction on July 24, 2013; the California Supreme Court denied review on November 13, 2013.
Dennis filed a federal habeas petition in the Central District of California on August 25, 2014, which that court denied and dismissed without prejudice on April 3, 2015.
Dennis filed the instant pro se § 2254 petition signed October 9, 2015, asserting (1) improper exclusion of post-arrest statements as hearsay and (2) refusal to instruct on voluntary manslaughter based on unreasonable self-defense.
The magistrate judge concluded the petition appears untimely under AEDPA: the conviction became final February 11, 2014, the one-year limitations period ran from February 12, 2014 to February 12, 2015, and the October 9, 2015 filing is more than seven months late.
The court rejected statutory tolling (federal petition does not toll under § 2244(d)(2)) and found no basis shown for equitable tolling; ordered Dennis to show cause by November 6, 2015 why the petition should not be dismissed as untimely or face recommendation of dismissal with prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether petition filed within AEDPA one-year period	Dennis filed petition October 9, 2015 (constructive filing date) — implies timely or requests consideration	Respondent asserts AEDPA one-year expired Feb 12, 2015, so petition is untimely	Court: Petition appears untimely by >7 months under § 2244(d)(1)
Whether statutory tolling under § 2244(d)(2) applies for pendency of earlier federal petition	Dennis may rely on prior filings to toll limitations	Respondent: only state post-conviction proceedings toll; federal petitions do not toll	Court: Section 2244(d)(2) does not toll during pendency of prior federal habeas; statutory tolling does not save petition
Whether equitable tolling applies	Dennis did not assert equitable tolling in response	Potentially could argue extraordinary circumstances	Court: No claim or evidence of extraordinary circumstances; equitable tolling not warranted
Whether case should be dismissed or allowed voluntary dismissal	Dennis may seek voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a) to avoid adverse ruling	Court warns dismissed claims may be time-barred later; failure to respond will lead to recommendation of dismissal with prejudice	Court ordered show-cause response or voluntary dismissal by set date; warned of consequences for noncompliance

Soto v. Ryan, 760 F.3d 947 (9th Cir. 2014) (AEDPA standards for federal habeas review)
Thompson v. Lea, 681 F.3d 1093 (9th Cir. 2012) (one-year limitations under AEDPA)
Porter v. Ollison, 620 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2010) (finality of conviction when certiorari not sought)
Nedds v. Calderon, 678 F.3d 777 (9th Cir. 2012) (statutory tolling under § 2244(d)(2))
Duncan v. Walker, 533 U.S. 167 (U.S. 2001) (federal petitions do not toll state-court limitation statute)
Doe v. Busby, 661 F.3d 1001 (9th Cir. 2011) (equitable tolling available in extraordinary circumstances)
Bills v. Clark, 628 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir. 2010) (high threshold for equitable tolling)
Rudin v. Myles, 781 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2015) (petitioner’s heavy burden to obtain equitable tolling)
Roberts v. Marshall, 627 F.3d 768 (9th Cir. 2010) (prisoner mailbox rule for filing dates)