From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Ramsey

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
Jul 18, 2014
572 F. App'x 604 (10th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 14-6067

07-18-2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JESSE JAMES RAMSEY, III, Defendant-Appellant.


(D.C. Nos. 5:13-CV-01336-F &

5:10-CR-00120-F-1)

(W.D. Okla.)


ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

This order is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

Before GORSUCH, MURPHY, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

Roughly two years after his conviction for federal felony drug offenses became final, Jesse Ramsey filed a motion seeking to have his conviction and sentence set aside. But, as the district court recognized, a federal habeas petitioner normally has only one year within which to seek collateral relief like this. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f). Of course, the deadline can be tolled for equitable reasons and so the district court gave Mr. Ramsey a chance to file a response explaining why he should receive the benefit of equitable tolling — or, indeed, to explain any other reason why his claim shouldn't be dismissed as time-barred. In the end, however, Mr. Ramsey failed to persuade the district court and that court dismissed his case as untimely.

Mr. Ramsey now seeks to appeal this holding. To do so, he must first obtain a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c). And to do that, he must show "jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling." Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2).

This much we cannot say Mr. Ramsey has accomplished. In his submission to this court, he insists that he failed to file within the one-year statute of limitations because his attorney never returned his phone calls and because he was led to believe he had more time by other prisoners. Though Mr. Ramsey argues that this entitles him to equitable tolling, our precedent requires us to hold otherwise. See Johnson v. Jones, 502 F. App'x 807, 809 (10th Cir. 2012) (rejecting petitioner's request for equitable tolling based on his attorney's failure to file appeal after petitioner instructed him to). Mr. Ramsey's request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, but his request for a COA is denied and this appeal is dismissed.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Neil M. Gorsuch

Circuit Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Ramsey

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
Jul 18, 2014
572 F. App'x 604 (10th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

United States v. Ramsey

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JESSE JAMES RAMSEY, III…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Jul 18, 2014

Citations

572 F. App'x 604 (10th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

United States v. Ramsey

The district court dismissed the motion as untimely, and we denied a certificate of appealability. United…