The opinion of the court was delivered by: Susan Illston, United States District Judge
The petition is dismissed because it was not timely filed.
IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED.
Grant Rose White, a California prisoner at the California State Prison — Sacramento, filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his 1996 conviction. This matter is now before the court for consideration of respondent's motion to dismiss the petition as untimely. The court finds that the petition was not filed by the deadline in 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d) and therefore will dismiss the petition as untimely.
Grant Rose White was convicted at a jury trial in Santa Clara County Superior Court of felony possession of cocaine base for sale and misdemeanor possession of 25.8 grams or less of marijuana. See Cal. Health & Safety Code §§ 11351.5, 11357(b). He also was found to have suffered four prior convictions. See Cal. Penal Code § 667. On June 20, 1996, White was sentenced to a term of 25 years to life in prison.
White appealed. His conviction was affirmed by the California Court of Appeal on October 24, 1997 and his petition for review was denied by the California Supreme Court on February 18, 1998.
White filed a federal petition for writ of habeas corpus on December 28, 1998. See White v. Plifer, C 98-4914 SI. The petition was dismissed on May 16, 2000 because White had not exhausted his state court remedies before filing his federal petition.
White returned to state court and filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on July 21, 2000. The state habeas petition was denied on November 29, 2000.
The current federal habeas petition was mailed to the court in an envelope postmarked December 1, 2002 and was stamped "filed" in this court on December 12, 2002.
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 ("AEDPA"), which became law on April 24, 1996, imposed for the first time a statute of limitations on petitions for a writ of habeas corpus filed by state prisoners. Petitions filed by prisoners challenging non-capital state convictions or sentences must be filed within one year of the latest of the date on which: (1) the judgment became final after the conclusion of direct review or the time passed for seeking direct review; (2) an impediment to filing an application created by unconstitutional state action was removed, if such action prevented petitioner from filing; (3) the constitutional right asserted was recognized by the Supreme Court, if the right was newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactive to cases on collateral review; or (4) the factual predicate of the claim could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence. 28 U.S.C. ...