United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
SYLVESTER H. CLAY, JR., Movant,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
G. FLEISSIG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on the motion of movant Sylvester
H. Clay, Jr. to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (Docket No. 1). The motion
appears to be time-barred. Therefore, for the reasons
discussed below, the Court will order movant to show cause
why the motion should not be summarily denied and dismissed.
28, 2017, movant pleaded guilty to being a felon in
possession of a firearm. United States v. Clay, No.
4:17-cr-38-AGF-1 (E.D. Mo.). He was sentenced on October 13,
2017 to 72 months' imprisonment. Movant did not file a
filed the instant 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion on July 5,
2019, by placing it in his institution's mail
system. He asserts that his 72-month sentence
should be vacated and that he should be released from
imprisonment based on the United States Supreme Court's
decision in Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191
(2019). Specifically, he argues that the government did not
show that he both possessed a firearm and knew he
held the relevant status as a felon when he possessed it.
is a pro se litigant who is currently incarcerated at the El
Reno Federal Correctional Institution in El Reno, Oklahoma.
He brings this motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255,
alleging that his sentence should be vacated pursuant to the
Supreme Court's decision in Rehaif v. United
States. For the reasons discussed below, the motion
appears to be untimely, and movant will be directed to show
cause why this action should not be denied and dismissed.
Statute of Limitations
brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 are subject to a
one-year limitations period. Peden v. United States,
914 F.3d 1151, 1152 (8th Cir. 2019). The
limitations period runs from the latest of four dates:
(1) the date on which the judgment of conviction becomes
(2) the date on which the impediment to making a motion
created by governmental action in violation of the
Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the
movant was prevented from making a motion by such
(3) the date on which the right asserted was initially
recognized by the Supreme Court, if that right has been newly
recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively
applicable to cases on collateral review; or
(4) the date on which the facts supporting the claim or
claims presented could have been discovered through the
exercise of due diligence.
28 U.S.C. § 2255(f). In practice, however, the one-year
statute of limitations “usually means that a prisoner
must file a motion within one year of the date on which the
judgment of conviction becomes final.” Mora-Higuera