Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Howard

United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division

May 11, 2015

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
TERRANCE SHAMONT HOWARD

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ROBERT E. PAYNE, Senior District Judge.

Terrance Shamont Howard, a federal inmate proceeding pro se, brings this motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ("§ 2255 Motion, " ECF No. 40.) The Government has moved to dismiss, inter alia, on the ground that the statute of limitations bars the § 2255 Motion. For the reasons set forth below, the § 2255 Motion will be dismissed as barred by the statute of limitations.

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Howard pled guilty to distributing heroin. (Plea Agreement 1, ECF No. 12.) On January 15, 2008, the Court entered judgment against Howard and sentenced him to 151 months of imprisonment. (J. 2, ECF No. 24.) Howard did not appeal.

On June 21, 2012, Howard placed the present § 2255 Motion in prison mail system for mailing to this Court. (§ 2255 Mot. 4.) The Court deems the § 2255 Motion filed as of that date. See Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988). In his § 2255 Motion, Howard asserts entitlement to relief upon the ground that the Court incorrectly sentenced him as a career offender.

II. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS

Section 101 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act ("AEDPA") amended 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to establish a one-year period of limitation for the filing of a § 2255 Motion. Specifically, 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f) now reads:

(f) A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to a motion under this section. The limitation period shall run from the latest of-
(1) the date on which the judgment of conviction becomes final;
(2) the date on which the impediment to making a motion created by governmental action in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the movant was prevented from making a motion by such governmental action;
(3) the date on which the right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court, if that right has been newly recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review; or
(4) the date on which the facts supporting the claim or claims presented could have been discovered through the exercise of due diligence.

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (f).

A. The Statute Of Limitations Bars Howard's ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.