|MARK KEVIN PRESGROVE,
(D.C. No. 99-CV-147-W)
Presgrove now seeks a certificate of appealability from this court regarding the timeliness of his federal habeas petition. He asserts both that AEDPA does not apply to his petition, and that we should equitably toll the limitations period to preserve his petition. For substantially the same reasons identified in the magistrate's report and recommendation, it is clear that Presgrove did not file the instant petition within the one-year limitations period prescribed by AEDPA. In addition, Presgrove's arguments that AEDPA should not apply and that he should receive equitable tolling of the limitations period are without merit.
We therefore deny Presgrove's request for a certificate of appealability.
The mandate shall issue forthwith.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
David M. Ebel
*.After examining appellant's brief and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This Order and Judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.