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.

Williams v. United States

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division

July 9, 2018

JIMMY LEE WILLIAMS, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

          ORDER

          Frank D. Whitney Chief United States District Judge.

         THIS 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).

         I. BACKGROUND

         Petitioner 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).

         Petitioner 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 expired.

         II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

         A 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).

         III. DISCUSSION

         (1) Limitations

         A 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 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 ...

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.