Benitez-Medina v. United States of America - Document No. 2
Benitez-Medina v. United States of America - Document No. 2
Benitez-Medina v. United States of America - Document No. 2
2
Case 4:06-cv-00081-JCH Document 2 Filed 02/02/2006 Page 1 of 4
CAMILO BENITEZ-MEDINA, )
)
Movant, )
)
v. ) No. 4:06-CV-81-JCH
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Respondent. )
Background
conviction.
Motion to Vacate
He argues that his conviction and sentence are invalid under the
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 4:06-cv-00081-JCH Document 2 Filed 02/02/2006 Page 2 of 4
defendant).
Discussion
2
Case 4:06-cv-00081-JCH Document 2 Filed 02/02/2006 Page 3 of 4
however, was filed on January 17, 2006, well after the running of
2255(3), which provides that the limitation period runs from "the
review and, therefore, extends the period for the filing of his §
2255 motion.
Court of Appeals has held that Booker does not apply retroactively
States, 413 F.3d 781, 783-84 (8th Cir. 2005). Moreover, in Dodd v.
United States, 125 S.Ct. 2478, 2482 (2005), the United States
Supreme Court held that the one-year limitation period for filing
the Supreme Court ran from the date on which the Supreme Court
initially recognized the right asserted, not from the date on which
3
Case 4:06-cv-00081-JCH Document 2 Filed 02/02/2006 Page 4 of 4
decided on March 8, 2004; however, the instant motion was not filed
retroactivity.
231 F.3d 460, 463 (8th Cir. 2000) (equitable tolling proper only
order.