United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
D. Whitney Chief United States District Judge.
MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner's
pro se Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct
Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, (Doc. No. 1).
pled guilty in the underlying criminal case to two counts of
conspiracy to defraud the United States and one count of
money laundering and aiding and abetting. (3:15-cr-73, Doc.
Nos. 19, 22, 24). The Court sentenced him to a total of 105
months' imprisonment. (3:15-cr-73, Doc. No. 40).
Petitioner raised a single claim of ineffective assistance of
counsel on direct appeal. The Fourth Circuit affirmed on
November 21, 2016, because the record did not conclusively
establish that counsel had provided ineffective assistance.
United States v. Williams, 670 Fed.Appx. 795
(4th Cir. 2016).
filed the instant § 2255 Motion to Vacate on February
18, 2018. He raises claims of ineffective trial counsel,
ineffective appellate counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, and
trial court error. The petition does not address the
timeliness and the Court ordered him to do so by June 4,
2018. (Doc. No. 3). Rather than complying, Petitioner filed
Motions to stay these proceedings and for an extension of
time to file an Amended § 2255 Motion to Vacate. (Doc.
Nos. 2, 4). On June 6, 2018, the Court denied the Motion to
stay and granted Petitioner 20 days to file his Amended
§ 2255 Motion to Vacate. (Doc. No. 6). The time for
filing an Amended § 2255 Motion to Vacate has now
STANDARD OF REVIEW
federal prisoner claiming that his “sentence was
imposed in violation of the Constitution or the laws of the
United States, or that the court was without jurisdiction to
impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of
the maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to
collateral attack, may move the court which imposed the
sentence to vacate, set aside or correct the sentence.”
28 U.S.C. § 2255(a). Rule 4(b) of the Rules Governing
Section 2255 Proceedings provides that courts are to promptly
examine motions to vacate, along with “any attached
exhibits and the record of prior proceedings . . .” in
order to determine whether the petitioner is entitled to any
relief on the claims set forth therein. After examining the
record in this matter, the Court finds that the argument
presented by the Petitioner can be resolved based on the
record and governing case law. See Raines v. United
States, 423 F.2d 526, 529 (4th Cir. 1970).
one-year statute of limitation applies to motions to vacate
under § 2255, which runs from the latest of:
(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