Dimott v. United States

The First Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of three federal post-conviction relief petitions filed under 28 U.S.C. 2255, holding that the three petitions were untimely.Petitioners in these consolidated appeals each pled guilty to a federal firearm offense, and each had a history of Maine state burglary convictions. Each petitioner filed a federal habeas petition alleging that they no longer qualified for a sentence enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) because the ACCA’s residual clause was invalidated by Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. __ (2015) (Johnson II). All three petitions filed their habeas petitions outside of the one-year statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C. 2255(f)(1). Specifically, Petitioners alleged that their petitions were timely because Johnson II, which is retroactively applicable, was the source of their claims. The district court dismissed the petitions. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the federal habeas petitions were untimely because they raised Mathis v. United States, 579 U.S. __ (2016), claims, not Johnson II claims, and Mathis does not reset the statute of limitations under section 2255(f)(3). View "Dimott v. United States" on Justia Law