Brown v. Angelone

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT BENJAMIN BROWN,  Petitioner-Appellant, v.  No. 01-7709 RONALD ANGELONE, Director of Corrections, Respondent-Appellee.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-1385-AM) Submitted: January 28, 2002 Decided: February 8, 2002 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. COUNSEL Benjamin Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 BROWN v. ANGELONE OPINION PER CURIAM: Benjamin Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001). For the reasons set forth below, we vacate and remand for further proceedings. The district court, acting sua sponte, determined from the face of Brown’s petition that his claims were barred by the one-year limita- tions period set forth in 28 U.S.C.A. § 2244(d) (West Supp. 2001) and dismissed the action without giving Brown notice or an opportunity to respond. Our recent decision in Hill v. Braxton, No. 00-7408, ___ F.3d ___, 2002 WL 45893 (4th Cir. Jan. 14, 2002), now requires the district court to provide such a warning "unless it is indisputably clear from the materials presented to the district court that the petition is untimely and cannot be salvaged by equitable tolling principles or any of the circumstances enumerated in § 2244(d)(1)." Id. at *5. Because it is not "indisputably clear" that Brown cannot salvage his petition, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, grant a certifi- cate of appealability, vacate the district court’s order, and remand to the district court to provide Brown with the notice and opportunity to respond to which he is now entitled pursuant to Hill. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade- quately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. VACATED AND REMANDED