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.

Ryder v. United States

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

January 7, 2020

CHRISTOPHER OWEN RYDER, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

          ORDER

          JAMES D. WHITTEMORE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         BEFORE THE COURT are Petitioner Ryder's Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence (cv Dkt. 1), his memorandum in support (Id. at 14-19), the United States' response (cv Dkt. 4), and Ryder's reply (cv Dkt. 7). Upon consideration, Ryder's § 2255 motion is DENIED as time barred.

         PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         In 1995, Ryder pleaded guilty to bank robbery, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, and carjacking. (cr Dkt. 41). He was sentenced to 354 months in prison and 60 months of supervised release. (cr Dkt. 53). Ryder did not file a direct appeal.

         On April 25, 2017, Ryder signed his § 2255 motion. (cv Dkt. 1). He raises one ground for relief. (Id. at 4):

The federal statute requiring a consecutive mandatory minimum sentence when a drug trafficking or crime of violence involves a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), does not preclude the judge from imposing a sentence as short as one day for the underlying[] predicate crime.

         The Government contends that Ryder's § 2255 motion is time barred. (cv Dkt. 4 at 3).

         DISCUSSION

         I. Timeliness

         The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (“AEDPA”) establishes a one-year limitation period for § 2255 motions. See Goodman v. United States, 151 F.3d 1335, 1336 (11th Cir. 1998). Specifically, § 2255 provides that the one-year limitation shall run 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 ...

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.