AEDPA’s statute of limitations period is tolled from the date an application is amended to add relevant claims until this court rules on the application
How later courts described this case
- AEDPA’s statute of limitations period is tolled from the date an application is amended to add relevant claims until this court rules on the application
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SEP 22 2025
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
RONALD D. YOUNG, No. 24-5699
Applicant,
ORDER
v.
KELLY SANTORO,
Respondent.
Before: SILVERMAN, OWENS, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
The supplemental application for authorization to file a second or successive
28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas corpus petition in the district court is denied as
unnecessary because it raises claims solely regarding the denial of the applicant’s
petition for resentencing under California Penal Code § 1170.951, which did not
become ripe until after the applicant’s prior § 2254 habeas petition was denied. See
Brown v. Atchley, 76 F.4th 862, 872-73 & n.1 (9th Cir. 2023).
We express no opinion as to the merits of the applicant’s claims or whether
the procedural requirements of 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(d) and 2254 are satisfied.
1 After Young filed his petition for resentencing, section 1170.95 was
renumbered as section 1172.6 effective June 30, 2022. See Stats. 2022, ch. 58,
§ 10.
The clerk will transfer the supplemental application filed at Docket Entry
No. 23 to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, to
be processed as a § 2254 petition. The petition is deemed filed in the district court
on September 30, 2024, the date on which the applicant delivered to prison
authorities for forwarding to this court a submission challenging his resentencing
proceedings. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270
(1988); Orona v. United States, 826 F.3d 1196, 1198-99 (9th Cir. 2016) (AEDPA’s
statute of limitations period is tolled from the date an application is amended to
add relevant claims until this court rules on the application).
Upon transfer of the application, the clerk will close this original action.
Because the application is being transferred to the district court, we take no
action on any pending motions.
No further filings will be entertained in this case.
DENIED AS UNNECESSARY; SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION
TRANSFERRED to the district court.