The opinion
FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 22 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARLOWE BROWN, No. 11-15255
Petitioner - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:09-cv-03241-JAM
v.
MEMORANDUM *
U.S. DISTRICT COURT and RICK HILL,
Warden,
Respondents - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of California
John A. Mendez, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 21, 2012 **
Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
California state prisoner Marlowe Brown 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.
*
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. Appellant. P. 34(a)(2).
The district court properly dismissed the habeas petition as untimely, as it
was filed after the one-year statutory limitations period had ended. See 28 U.S.C. §
2244(d); Banjo v. Ayers, 614 F.3d 964, 967-69 (9th Cir. 2010).
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); Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (per curiam).
AFFIRMED.
2 11-15255