McMonagle v. Meyer

Summary

A California jury convicted Brian McMonagle of a DUI (and another misdemeanor of driving with a blood alcohol level of .08% of higher) in late 2008. McMonagle sought review by the appellate division of the Superior Court, which reversed the second misdemeanor but not the DUI. In early 2010, a Cal. Court of Appeal denied McMonagle's transfer request. He then filed a habeas petition with the Cal. Supreme Court, which denied it on June 17, 2010. On August 10, 2011, McMonagle filed a federal habeas petition, but the district court dismissed it as untimely, noting that his conviction became final more than a year earlier. McMonagle appealed to this court, which reversed the district court. An en banc panel voted for rehearing.
Reversed and remanded. AEDPA prescribes a one-year statute of limitations (SOL), which runs from the date a prisoner's judgment becomes final. In Larche, this court held that California misdemeanants must seek habeas relief from the Cal. Supreme Court in order to fully exhaust their claims (as McMonagle did here). However, Larche created "undue confusion" for petitioners like McMonagle. For instance, Larche's requirement that misdemeanants seek Cal. Supreme Court review before federal relief restricts California's "ability to dictate its own systems of appellate review." Indeed, this court reasoned, "the exhaustion doctrine turns on an inquiry into what procedures are 'available' under state law." The key question is "whether the type of review at issue forms part of the state's ordinary appellate review procedure" (O'Sullivan v. Boerckel). Here, for challenges to misdemeanor convictions not heard on the merits by the Cal. Courts of Appeal, review by the state high court is "decidedly outside of the state's ordinary appellate review." Thus, this en banc panel overruled Larche. Furthermore, this court granted McMonagle equitable tolling with regard to his federal habeas petition, due to the fact that McMonagle had "relie[d] on [the 9th Circuit's] legally erroneous holding."
Opinion by Judge Nguyen.

— Brian Cardile