Sexton v. USA

Filing 7

ORDER denying 5 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge Barbara B. Crabb on 1/9/17. (jat)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ORDER Plaintiff, 16-cv-762-bbc 14-cr-86-bbc v. JAMES SEXTON, Defendant. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - On November 17, 2016, defendant James Sexton filed a motion for post conviction relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In an order entered on November 22, 2016, I denied the motion as untimely. Defendant had been sentenced in this court on August 20, 2015. His judgment and commitment were entered on the docket on August 21, 2015; his conviction became final 14 days later when he failed to file an appeal. His deadline for filing a post conviction motion was September 4, 2016. His motion was not filed until November 15, 2016. Now defendant has filed a motion for reconsideration of the court’s November 22, 2016 order denying his motion as untimely. He challenges the court’s calculation of his filing deadline, asserting that his conviction became final and the one-year limitation period 1 began to run when the 90-day time period expired for filing a petition for certiorari contesting the appellate court's affirmation of the conviction. However, the record shows that defendant did not file a direct appeal or a petition for writ of certiorari so his conviction became 14 days after August 21, 2015, when the time for him to file a direct appeal expired. Nothing in defendant’s motion for reconsideration convinces me that it was error to deny his motion as untimely. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that defendant James Sexton’s motion for reconsideration is DENIED. Entered this 9th day of January, 2017. BY THE COURT: /s/ BARBARA B. CRABB District Judge 2

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?