United States v. Harold
United States v. Harold
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 96-7563 MARSHALL HAROLD, Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore.
Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CR-94-395-S, CA-96-2405-S) Submitted: July 30, 1998 Decided: August 14, 1998 Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. _________________________________________________________________ Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. _________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Marshall Harold, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia, United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, 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 _________________________________________________________________ Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 May 1995, and he filed his habeas motion on August 2, 1996. 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
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.