United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Newport News Division
RAYMOND A. JACKSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Hyman ("Petitioner") has filed a. pro se
motion to vacate, set aside, or correct her sentence pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Having considered Petitioner's
motion, the Court concludes that Petitioner has not shown any
reason for the Court to toll the statute of limitations
provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Accordingly,
Petitioner's motion is DISMISSED.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
February 19, 2016, Petitioner pleaded guilty to the criminal
information charging Petitioner with Unlawful Monetary
Transactions, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1957. ECF No.
9. On October 3, 2016, the Court sentenced Petitioner to
ninety-six (96) months in prison. ECF No. 24.
Petitioner's total offense level was 22, her criminal
history category was VI, and her guideline range was 84 to
105 months. ECF No. 22. Petitioner did not appeal. Petitioner
later filed a motion to reduce her sentence on March 12, 2018
which was subsequently denied by this Court on July 9, 2018
due to untimely filling. ECF Nos. 30 and 42. Petitioner filed
the present motion to vacate on August 6, 2018. ECF No. 43.
Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255 statute of limitations
1996, Congress amended the law governing § 2255 motions
as a part of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty
Act ("AEDPA"). See 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
Section 2255 provides in relevant part that:
A 1-year period of limitation shall apply to a motion under
this section. The limitation period shall run from the latest
(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
exercise of due diligence.
28 U.S.C. § 2255. To determine whether Petitioner has
timely filed her motion, the Court must measure one year from
the most recent date provided by § 2255 subsections one