Case ID: f-appx_216/html/0828-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Olegario Pineda MOLINA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 06-14160
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Feb. 2, 2007.
    Olegario Pineda Molina, Loretto, PA, Pro Se.
    Amy Levin Weil, William H. Thomas, Jr., United States Attorney’s Office, Atlanta, GA, for Appellee.
    Before HULL, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Olegario Pineda Molina, proceeding pro se, challenges the district court’s dismissal of his pro se motion to vacate his sentence, brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The district court dismissed Pineda Molina’s motion as time-barred, but granted a certificate of appealability (“COA”) as to the underlying constitutional claims raised in the motion. “When a district court dismisses a petition as time-barred, it is inappropriate to grant a COA on the constitutional claim.... ” Ross v. Moore, 246 F.3d 1299, 1300 (11th Cir.2001) (involving petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254). Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s order granting a COA and remand the case to the district court for the limited purpose of considering whether a COA should be granted on the question of whether Pineda Molina’s § 2255 motion was time-barred.

VACATED AND REMANDED.