Salinas-Garcia v. United States
- Loretta Preska
- 1:20-cv-01027
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Salinas-Garcia v. United States, Senior Judge Preska denied Salinas-Garcia’s challenge to his federal sentence as filed too late.
Jose Fernando Salinas-Garcia, whose motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his federal sentence was denied as time-barred.
What happened
In Salinas-Garcia v. United States, Jose Fernando Salinas-Garcia, representing himself, asked the court to set aside or correct his federal sentence. The court treated his filing as a motion under a federal law allowing prisoners to challenge their sentences.
Salinas-Garcia had pleaded guilty to a cocaine-distribution conspiracy and related possession offense. The court sentenced him to 235 months in prison in 2006, and his conviction became final after he did not appeal. He filed his challenge more than thirteen years later and did not explain why it was timely.
Senior Judge Loretta A. Preska denied the motion as filed too late because the law generally gives one year to file such a challenge. She also declined to issue a certificate allowing an appeal, certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, closed the case, and denied any pending motions as moot.
The detailed version
- Salinas-Garcia v. United States · No. 1:20-cv-01027
- Loretta Preska
- Oct. 21, 2020
Background
Jose Fernando Salinas-Garcia, proceeding without a lawyer, moved under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his federal criminal sentence. The court construed his February 5, 2020 filing, titled “Demand to Abate or Vacate Void Judgment,” as a § 2255 motion, even though Salinas-Garcia later argued that his filing was not a § 2255 petition and that the court lacked jurisdiction.
Salinas-Garcia had pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. On May 24, 2006, the court entered judgment sentencing him to 235 months’ imprisonment. Because he did not appeal, the conviction became final on June 8, 2006.
Timeliness
Section 2255 generally imposes a one-year limitations period for sentence challenges. On February 18, 2020, the court ordered Salinas-Garcia to submit a declaration explaining why his motion should not be denied as time-barred. He declined to file the requested declaration and did not explain how a motion filed more than thirteen years after his conviction became final was timely.
Ruling
Senior United States District Judge Loretta A. Preska denied the § 2255 motion as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(1). The court therefore disposed of the motion on the filing deadline and did not decide the underlying challenge to the sentence. The court also held that Salinas-Garcia had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, so it would not issue a certificate of appealability. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith, directed the Clerk to mark the action closed and deny all pending motions as moot, and directed that a copy of the order be mailed to Salinas-Garcia.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.