Court Opinion

ID: 995985
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 00:44:47.78876+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:25.109339
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                    No. 97-6637

DEAN A. LAMBEY,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge.
(CR-89-80-R, CA-97-290)

Submitted: July 30, 1998

Decided: August 19, 1998

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Mel Dahl, Fall River, Massachusetts, for Appellant. Stephen Wiley
Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Rich-
mond, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from a district court order that concluded his
motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998)
was barred by the one-year limitations period of 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255
(West Supp. 1998). Appellant's conviction became final in 1994, and
he filed his habeas motion on February 25, 1997. Appellant had until
April 23, 1997 to file his § 2255 motion. See Brown v. Angelone, ___
F.3d ___, 1998 WL 389030 (4th Cir. July 14, 1998) (Nos. 96-7173,
96-7208). Therefore, his motion was not time barred. For these rea-
sons, we grant a certificate of appealability on this issue, vacate the
district court's order, and remand for further proceedings. We dis-
pense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED

                    2