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.

United States v. Jaime-Perez

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

June 30, 2017

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Karin Florentino Jaime-Perez, Defendant. Civil No. 17-736 ADM

          Benjamin Bejar, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, Minneapolis, MN, on behalf of Plaintiff.

          Karin Florentino Jaime-Perez, pro se.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          ANN D. MONTGOMERY, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

         I. INTRODUCTION

         This matter is before the undersigned United States District Judge for determination of Karin Florentino Jaime-Perez's (“Jaime-Perez”) Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (“2255 Motion”) to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence [Criminal Docket No. 51][1]. For the reasons stated below the 2255 Motion is denied.

         II. BACKGROUND

         In October 2014, Jaime-Perez entered a guilty plea to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Jaime-Perez's Plea Agreement [Docket No. 41] allowed Jaime-Perez to appeal his sentence. On June 18, 2015, Jaime-Perez was sentenced to 97 months in prison. Sentencing J. [Docket No. 49]. The sentence was a three-level downward variation from the applicable advisory guideline range. The Judgment of Conviction was filed on June 18, 2015. Jaime-Perez did not timely appeal his sentence.

         On March 9, 2017, Jaime-Perez filed this 2255 Motion arguing his counsel was ineffective because counsel: 1) failed to file a U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1 motion for cooperation, 2) failed to file a U.S.S.G. 5K3.1 motion for early disposition program, 3) promised Jaime-Perez his sentence would be reduced due to the passage of an upcoming law, and 4) failed to file a motion for a safety valve reduction under U.S.S.G. §§ 2D1.1(b)(17) and 5C1.2.

         III. DISCUSSION

         A. Section 2255 Standard

         28 U.S.C. § 2255 provides a person in federal custody with a limited opportunity to collaterally attack the constitutionality, jurisdictional basis, or legality of his sentence. See United States v. Addonizio, 442 U.S. 178, 185 (1979). Relief is reserved for violations of constitutional rights and for a narrow range of injuries which were outside a direct appeal and which, if untreated, would result in a miscarriage of justice. See Poor Thunder v. United States, 810 F.2d 817, 821-22 (8th Cir. 1987).

         B. Statute of Limitations

         For a 2255 claim to be timely, it must typically be made within one year from the date the conviction becomes final. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(i); Headbird v. United States, 813 F.3d 1092, 1094 (8th Cir. 2016).

         Jaime-Perez's conviction became final on July 2, 2015, when the 14-day period to appeal the Judgment expired. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A) (setting a 14-day time limit for filing a notice of appeal in a criminal case). Thus, the one-year statute of limitations period under § 2255(f)(1) expired on July 2, 2016. This Motion, however, was filed on March 9, 2017. Id. This is months beyond the statute of limitations and makes this Motion untimely. See United States v. Hernandez, ...


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.