United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-60484

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Erik Ivan Betancourt Olguin, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 1:21-CV-141

 USDC No. 1:18-CR-30-1

Before Stewart, Haynes, and Ho, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Erik Ivan Betancourt Olguin, federal prisoner # 20670-043, moves for 

a certificate of appealability (COA) to appeal the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C 

§ 2255 motion challenging his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to 

possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine. The district court sua 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 14, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-60484 Document: 00516280923 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/14/2022
No. 21-60484

2

sponte dismissed Betancourt Olguin’s § 2255 motion, in which he raised a 

claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, as time barred.

A COA may be issued only if the movant “has made a substantial 

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); see 

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000). When a district court rejects 

a claim on procedural grounds, this court will issue a COA only if the movant 

“shows, at least, that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the 

[motion] states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that 

jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct 

in its procedural ruling.” Slack, 529 U.S. at 484.

Pursuant to a Supreme Court order dated March 19, 2020,1 the 

deadline for Betancourt Olguin to file his petition for a writ of certiorari was 

extended to 150 days from this court’s January 14, 2020 judgment affirming 

his conviction. See United States v. Olguin, 790 F. App’x 5 (5th Cir. 2020). 

Accordingly, Betancourt Olguin’s judgment of conviction would have 

become final on June 12, 2020, and he would have had until June 12, 2021, to 

file his § 2255 motion; his § 2255 motion, filed on April 14, 2021, was 

therefore seemingly timely. See § 2255(f)(1); Clay v. United States, 537 U.S. 

522, 532 (2003). Further, reasonable jurists could debate whether 

Betancourt Olguin’s claim that his trial counsel rendered ineffective 

assistance by misadvising him during plea negotiations states a valid claim of 

the denial of a constitutional right. See Houser v. Dretke, 395 F.3d 560, 561 

(5th Cir. 2004). 

As Betancourt Olguin has made the necessary showing, we GRANT

his motion for a COA. See Slack, 529 U.S. at 484; Houser, 395 F.3d at 561. 

1 See https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/031920zr_d1o3.pdf.

Case: 21-60484 Document: 00516280923 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/14/2022
No. 21-60484

3

Since further briefing is unnecessary, we VACATE the judgment of the 

district court and REMAND for further proceedings. 

Case: 21-60484 Document: 00516280923 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/14/2022