Long v. US, No. 09-16232

By FindLaw Staff on November 22, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

Denial of Motion to Vacate Sentence Vacated

In Long v. US, No. 09-16232, petitioner's appeal from the district court's dismissal of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, as untimely, the court vacated the order where the district court violated Clisby v. Jones, 960 F.2d 925 (11th Cir. 1992), by failing to address petitioner's claim that he was entitled to statutory tolling of the limitations period pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2255(f)(4) and Aron v. United States, 291 F.3d 708 (11th Cir. 2002), due to trial counsel's failure to file a requested direct appeal.

As the court wrote: "Mickey L. Long, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court's dismissal of his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, 28 U.S.C. § 2255, as untimely. We granted him a certificate of appealability (COA) on the following issue: Whether the district court violated Clisby v. Jones, 960 F.2d 925 (11th Cir. 1992), by failing to address Long's claim that he was entitled to statutory tolling of the limitations period, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f)(4) and Aron v. United States, 291 F.3d 708 (11th Cir. 2002),

due to trial counsel's failure to file a requested direct appeal."

Related Resources

Read the Eleventh Circuit's Decision in Long v. US, No. 09-16232