United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
E. Payne Senior United States District Judge
Molina, a federal inmate proceeding pro se, brings
this motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (ECF No. 63).
The Government has responded, asserting that Molina's
§ 2255 Motion is untimely. (ECF No. 65.) For the reasons
set forth below, the § 2255 Motion will be dismissed as
barred by the statute of limitations.
September 10, 2015, the Court entered judgment against Molina
and sentenced him to 120 months of imprisonment for disposing
of a firearm or ammunition to a person knowing that such
person is a convicted felon. (ECF No. 52, at
1-2.J Molina did not appeal.
August 22, 2017, Molina placed the present § 2255 Motion
in the prison mail system for mailing to this Court. (ECF No.
63, at 14.) 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, Molina contends that he
failed to receive the effective assistance of counsel because
counsel failed to alert Molina that Ronald Johnson, the owner
of the vehicle in which the ammunition and gun were found,
was willing to testify that Johnson placed the gun in the
vehicle unbeknownst to Molina. (ECF No. 63, at 7-8.)
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.
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
(1) the date on which the judgment of conviction becomes
(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
(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