Muhammad v. United States

by
Movant was convicted of aiding and abetting the robbery of a credit union, and aiding and abetting the use of a firearm during and in relation to the credit union robbery. On appeal, movant challenged the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion as untimely. The court concluded that movant's five-month confinement in a special housing unit did not constitute an extraordinary circumstance warranting the application of equitable tolling; equitable tolling did not apply in this instance where movant argued that he mistakenly relied upon his attorney's assertion that she would file a section 2255 motion on his behalf where the attorney's actions did not constitute an extraordinary circumstance; and even if the attorney's actions had constituted an extraordinary circumstance, movant did not act with diligence. Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court's judgment. View "Muhammad v. United States" on Justia Law