Sambrano-Almazan v. United States of America
ORDER denying Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (2255); mailed copy to Celia Del Carmen Sambrano-Almazan #29138-064 WASECA-FCI P O Box 1731 Waseca, MN 56093. Signed by Honorable Robin J. Cauthron on 3/1/17. (lg)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
CELIA DEL CARMEN
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant filed a Motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to correct or modify
her sentence. In support of her Motion, Defendant argues Amendment 794 changed the
Sentencing Guidelines and would entitle her to a reduction in her sentence. At the direction
of the Court, Plaintiff filed a Response. In its response, Plaintiff argues several reasons to
deny Defendant’s request. After consideration, the Court finds the Motion must be denied.
To the extent Defendant seeks relief under Amendment 794, bringing this action as
a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding is improper. See United States v. Torres-Aquino, 334 F.3d
939, 941 (10th Cir. 2003) (recognizing that where an Amendment only clarifies an
appropriate sentence any request for application of that Amendment must be brought under
28 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)).
Further, Defendant’s request for relief under § 2255 is untimely. Pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2255(f)(1), a Motion must be filed within one year of final judgment. Here,
judgment was entered as to Defendant on May 12, 2015. Defendant did not file an appeal;
therefore, her conviction was final on the day on which the time for filing her appeal
expired. United States v. Prows, 448 F.3d 1223, 1227-28 (10th Cir. 2006) (citing Moshier
v. United States, 402 F3d 116, 118 (2d Cir. 2005)). The Federal Rules of Appellate
Procedure set 14 days as the deadline for filing an appeal. Thus, Defendant’s conviction
was final on May 26, 2015, and the limitations period for pursuing a 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Motion expired one year later, or May 26, 2016. Defendant did not file the present Motion
until October 31, 2016. Therefore, her Motion is untimely.
Finally, as Plaintiff notes in its response, Defendant has executed an appellate
waiver as part of her plea agreement. The effect of that waiver is to bar challenges such as
the one presently pursued. She has offered nothing in her Motion to permit the Court to
ignore the effect of that waiver.
For the reasons set forth herein, Defendant’s Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to
Correct/Modify Sentence Pursuant to U.S.S.G. App. C. Amend. 794 (Dkt. No. 144) is
DENIED. A separate Judgment will issue.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of March, 2017.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?