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.

Castillo v. United States

United States District Court, D. Idaho

November 19, 2019

TYRA DANYAL CASTILLO, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER

          DAVID C. NYE CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         Pending before the Court is Defendant-Petitioner Tyra Danyal Castillo's pro se Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Dkt 42. The Government did not respond.

         Castillo styled her motion as one to allow her to file a direct appeal after fourteen days after the entry of judgment. However, “[a] document filed pro se is to be liberally construed . . . .” Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94, (2007) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 8(f) (“All pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice”). Thus, although Castillo did not style her motion as such, the Court construes Castillo's motion as one made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

         II. BACKGROUND

         On February 25, 2019, Castillo was sentenced to 137 months imprisonment, followed by 3 years of supervised release and a special assessment of $100. Dkt. 36. Judgment was entered that same day. Dkt. 37. No direct appeal was filed.

         On July 29, 2019, Petitioner filed the pending § 2255 motion.

         III. TIMELINESS OF PETITION

         Under the applicable statute of limitations, a § 2255 motion must be brought within one year after judgment of conviction becomes final unless the motion has been statutorily tolled according to 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(2)-(4). A judgment of conviction becomes final when it “has been rendered, the availability of appeal exhausted, and the time for a petition for certiorari elapsed or a petition for certiorari denied.” United States v. Schwartz, 274 F.3d 1220, 1223 (9th Cir. 2001). In a case where there is no direct appeal, a judgment of conviction becomes final fourteen days after the entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b). Petitioner's judgment became final on March 11, 2019, and she filed her § 2255 motion on July 29, 2019. Her § 2255 motion is timely filed.

         IV. STANDARD OF REVIEW

         Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255 provides four grounds under which a federal court may grant relief to a federal prisoner who challenges the imposition or length of his or her incarceration: (1) “that the sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States”; (2) “that the court was without jurisdiction to impose such sentence”; (3) “that the sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law”; and (4) that the sentence is otherwise “subject to collateral attack.”

         Rule 4(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings provides that a federal district court judge may summarily dismiss a § 2255 motion “[i]f it plainly appears from the face of the motion and any annexed exhibits and the prior proceedings in the case that the movant is not entitled to relief.” If the Court does not summarily dismiss pursuant to Rule 4(b), the Court shall order the Government “to file an answer or other pleading within the period of time fixed by the court or to take such other action as the judge deems appropriate.”

         V. DISCUSSION

         Castillo in essence claims her counsel was ineffective because he did not file an appeal upon her request. Based on her motion, the Court surmises that she is asking for her sentence be set aside and that she be resentenced so she can timely appeal or, ...


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.