United States District Court, C.D. Illinois, Springfield Division
RONALD L. COLLINS, Petitioner,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
MYERSCOUGH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
cause is before the Court on Petitioner Ronald Collin's
Motion to Vacate Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (d/e
1). Also before the Court is the Government's Motion to
Dismiss (d/e 6). Because Petitioner's Motion is untimely,
the Government's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED and
Petitioner's § 2255 motion is DISMISSED.
September 2014, Petitioner was charged by indictment of the
following counts: the production of child pornography under
18 U.S.C. § 2251(a) (Count 1), the receipt of child
pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2)(A) and (B)
(Count 2), the possession of child pornography under 18
U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B) (Count 3), and the production of
child pornography while being required to register as a sex
offender under 18 U.S.C. § 2260A (Count 4). See
United States v. Collins, United States District Court,
Central District of Illinois, Springfield Division, Case No.
14-cr-30038 (hereinafter, Crim.), Indictment (d/e 1).
January 2015, Petitioner pleaded guilty to Count 2 pursuant
to a plea agreement. See Crim. Plea Agreement (d/e
15). As part of the plea agreement, Petitioner and the
Government stipulated that the appropriate sentence in this
case would be 300 months' imprisonment on Count 2 and a
life term of supervised release. Id. at 5.
Petitioner waived his right to direct appeal regarding his
“plea agreement . . . conviction and . . .
sentence” other than claims of “involuntariness
or ineffective assistance of counsel.” Id. at
7-8. Petitioner also waived his right to collaterally attack
any issues related to his “plea agreement, conviction
and/or sentence, ” including in a § 2255 motion,
other than a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel.
Id. at 8.
Probation Office prepared a revised Presentence Investigation
Report (PSR). Crim. PSR (d/e 23). The PSR found that
Petitioner faced a mandatory minimum of 15 years imprisonment
and a maximum of 40 years on Count 2. Crim. PSR at ¶ 83
(d/e 23). This mandatory minimum was due to Petitioner's
previous conviction of Aggravated Criminal Sexual Abuse in
Illinois Circuit Court. In May 2015, this Court sentenced
Petitioner to the stipulated sentence of 300 months'
imprisonment. See Crim. Judgment (d/e 28).
Petitioner did not appeal the judgment.
2017, Petitioner filed this Motion Under 28 U.S.C. §
2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in
Federal Custody. See (d/e 1). Petitioner filed a
Motion to Amend (d/e 3), which the Court has construed as an
addendum to his § 2255 Motion. See July 20,
2017 Text Order. In his Motion, Petitioner alleges his Sixth
Amendment rights were violated based on ineffective
assistance of counsel for defense counsel's (1) failure
to properly evaluate whether his prior conviction qualified
for a mandatory life sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3559(e)
for Count 1 of the indictment; (2) failure to properly
evaluate whether his prior conviction would be used to
enhance his sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 2252(b)(1); (3)
failure to consider that, given Petitioner's age of 56 at
the time of sentencing, a 25- year sentence was essentially a
life sentence; and (4) failure to use F.R.E. 609(b) to
preclude evidence of the prior conviction. See
Motion (d/e 1 and 3). Petitioner alleges he is seeking
“redress for his ‘bad advice'”
comparable to the Supreme Court's recent decision in
Lee v. United States, 137 S.Ct. 1958, 1967 (2017).
See Motion (d/e 1).
September 2017, the Government filed a Motion to Dismiss,
alleging Petitioner's claims were untimely, that counsel
was not ineffective, and that Petitioner would have suffered
no prejudice had counsel been ineffective. See
Motion to Dismiss (d/e 6). Petitioner did not file a
person convicted of a federal crime may move to vacate, set
aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2255. Relief under § 2555 is an extraordinary remedy
because a § 2255 petitioner has already had “an
opportunity for full process.” Almonacid v. United
States, 476 F.3d 518, 521 (7th Cir. 2007). Here,
Petitioner's claims must be dismissed because they are
one-year period of limitation applies to § 2255
petitions. 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f). The one-year period
begins to run from the latest of:
(1) the date on which the judgment of conviction becomes
(2) the date on which the impediment to making a motion
created by governmental action in violation of the
Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the
movant was prevented from making a motion by such
(3) the date on which the right asserted was initially
recognized by the Supreme Court, if that right has been newly
recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively