Court Opinion

ID: 995988
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 00:44:49.511212+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:17:25.120641
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                    No. 97-6625

EMMA J. ALLEN,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge.
(CR-91-44, CA-97-249)

Submitted: July 30, 1998

Decided: August 19, 1998

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Emma J. Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Howard Crawford Vick, Jr.,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Vir-
ginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief
on her motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.
1998). Appellant's conviction became final in 1993. On March 24,
1997, Appellant filed a § 2255 motion. The district court denied relief
because Appellant filed her motion outside the one-year limitation
period imposed by § 2255. Pursuant to our recent decision in Brown
v. Angelone, ___ F.3d ___, Nos. 96-7173, 96-7208, 1998 WL 389030
(4th Cir. July 14, 1998), Appellant had until April 23, 1997, in which
to file a timely motion. Accordingly, because Appellant filed her
§ 2255 motion before April 23, 1997, we grant a certificate of
appealability, vacate the district court's order, and remand this case
for further proceedings. We dispense 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