Opinion
CR211-015
01-27-2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DAN MANGRAM
ORDER
Asserting his belief that he may be entitled to relief under Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. ___, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), defendant Dan Mangram asks this Court
to allow movant to preserve the relevant claims in Johnson v. United States made retroactive by the United States Supreme Court for Armed Career Criminals (ACC). It is movant's belief that he is entitled to the same legal facts and rights as a career offender, therefore, movant makes this request to preserve any Johnson v. United States claims that would eventually apply to his case.Doc. 944 at 1.
"Placeholder" motions obviously defeat Congress' one-year deadline for seeking § 2255 relief. See § 2255(f); see also Bouttry v. United States, 2012 WL 2153940 at * 2 (S.D. Ga. Apr. 30, 2012) (collecting cases denying placeholder motions); United States v. Ray, 2014 WL 6612615 at * 2 (E.D. La. Nov. 20, 2014) (court was not aware of any instances sanctioning use of "placeholder" § 2255 motions). But there are exceptions one can exploit past that deadline. See United States v. Stansall, 2016 WL 6269577 at * 6 (D. Neb. Oct. 26, 2016) (the § 2255 motion has been impeded by an unconstitutional or unlawful government action, or based on a newly recognized constitutional right, or supported by facts that could not have been discovered until after the judgment of conviction became final; too, when extraordinary circumstances beyond a petitioner's control prevent a timely filing, equitable tolling of the 1-year limitation period may be appropriate). Mangram cites none here.
Dan Mangarm's motion therefore is DENIED. Doc. 944.
SO ORDERED, this 27th day of January, 2017.
/s/_________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA