833 (11th Cir. 2014) (same); 135 S. Ct. 2945 (2015) (vacating Wynn v. United States, order in No. 13-4167 (6th Cir. Oct. 10, 2014) (same); Wynn v. United States, Jones v. 135 S. Ct. 2944 (2015) (vacating order in No. United States, United States v. Jones, § (3d. Cir. Feb. 20, 2015) (denying certificate of appealability to appeal denial of 2255 motion), and four in which the prisoner had been sentenced under the ACCA, see 135 S. Ct. 2946 (2015) (vacating 597 F. App’x Nipper v. Pastrana, Nipper v. Warden, 581 (11th Cir. 2015) (affirming denial of § 2241 habeas corpus petition); Coney v. 135 S. Ct. 2943 (2105) (vacating 579 F. App’x 848 (11th Pastrana, Coney v. Warden, Cir. 2014) (same); 135 S. Ct. 2940 (2015) (vacating Aiken v. Pastrana, Aiken v. Warden, 595 F. App’x 953 (11th Cir. 2014) (same); 135 S. Ct. 2942 (2015) Lynch v. United States, (vacating order in No. 14-14016E (11th Cir. Jan. 16, 2015) Lynch v. United States, § 2255 motion). (denying certificate of appealability to appeal denial of C. This motion is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3). This motion is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3), which provides for a one-year limitations period to run from date on which the right asserted was initially “the 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.” The Supreme Court decided on June 26, 2015, and [MR. DOE] filed his Johnson claim within a year of that date. As discussed above, the Supreme Court recognized a new right in and announced a substantive rule that is therefore retroactive to Johnson, cases on collateral review. CONCLUSION
833 (11th Cir. 2014) (same); Wynn v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2945 (2015) (vacating order in Wynn v. United States, No. 13-4167 (6th Cir. Oct. 10, 2014) (same); Jones v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2944 (2015) (vacating order in United States v. Jones, No. (3d. Cir. Feb. 20, 2015) (denying certificate of appealability to appeal denial of § 2255 motion), and four in which the prisoner had been sentenced under the ACCA, see Nipper v. Pastrana, 135 S. Ct. 2946 (2015) (vacating Nipper v. Warden, 597 F. App’x 581 (11th Cir. 2015) (affirming denial of § 2241 habeas corpus petition); Coney v. Pastrana, 135 S. Ct. 2943 (2105) (vacating Coney v. Warden, 579 F. App’x 848 (11th Cir. 2014) (same); Aiken v. Pastrana, 135 S. Ct. 2940 (2015) (vacating Aiken v. Warden, 595 F. App’x 953 (11th Cir. 2014) (same); Lynch v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2942 (2015) (vacating order in Lynch v. United States, No. 14-14016E (11th Cir. Jan. 16, 2015) (denying certificate of appealability to appeal denial of § 2255 motion). C. This motion is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3). This motion is timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(3), which provides for a one-year limitations period to run from “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.” The Supreme Court decided Johnson on June 26, 2015, and [MR. DOE] filed his claim within a year of that date. As discussed above, the Supreme Court recognized a new right in Johnson, and announced a substantive rule that is therefore retroactive to cases on collateral review. CONCLUSION
Sample-First-2255-Guidelines.docx