Case Name: Olegario Pineda MOLINA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-02-02
Citations: 216 F. App'x 828
Docket Number: No. 06-14160
Parties: Olegario Pineda MOLINA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before HULL, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 216
Pages: 828–829

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.