RonRico Simmons, Jr. v. United States
974 F.3d 791
| 6th Cir. | 2020Background
- RonRico Simmons pleaded guilty to federal drug and related charges; judgment entered September 8, 2016 and became final (appeal deadline) on September 22, 2016.
- §2255 one-year limitations period under 28 U.S.C. §2255(f)(1) would have expired September 22, 2017; Simmons filed his §2255 motion on August 13, 2018.
- Simmons invoked §2255(f)(2), alleging state custody law libraries (MDOC and Wayne County Jail) lacked federal materials and legal assistance, and that he did not gain adequate federal-law access until federal custody in late 2017, so the limitations period should begin then.
- The district court denied timeliness, finding Simmons’s allegations generalized and insufficiently specific to show which materials were missing or how that prevented filing; the court issued a certificate of appealability on two questions about (f)(2) scope and pleading specificity.
- The Sixth Circuit assumed, for purposes of decision, that lack of federal materials plus no legal-assistance program can constitute a constitutional impediment under §2255(f)(2), but held Simmons failed to plead facts showing the impediment actually prevented timely filing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether lack of access to federal law materials/assistance can constitute an "impediment" under §2255(f)(2) | Simmons: Lack of federal materials and assistance in state custody prevented timely §2255 filing, so (f)(2) tolling applies | Government: Motion is time-barred under (f)(1); Simmons did not plausibly show a causative impediment | Court: Assumed, without deciding, that such lack could be an unconstitutional impediment in principle but did not grant relief on facts here |
| How specific must a petitioner be to invoke §2255(f)(2)? (causation requirement) | Simmons: General assertion that lack of access "prevented" him from filing until federal custody; requested evidentiary hearing | Government: Petitioner must allege specific facts connecting the alleged impediment to failure to file; bare conclusions insufficient | Court: Petitioner must plead facts showing the impediment caused the untimely filing; Simmons’s conclusory allegations failed, so (f)(2) did not save his motion |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (access-to-courts doctrine limits relief to actual injury to court access)
- Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817 (prison must provide law libraries or legal assistance to ensure access to courts)
- Whalem/Hunt v. Early, 233 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. en banc) (lack of AEDPA materials can, in some circumstances, be an "impediment" to filing)
- Egerton v. Cockrell, 334 F.3d 433 (5th Cir. 2003) (absence of federal materials may toll AEDPA limitations if no alternative arrangements exist)
- Estremera v. United States, 724 F.3d 773 (7th Cir. 2013) (library inaccessibility can, in principle, be an ‘‘impediment,’’ but fact-specific showing required)
- Krause v. Thaler, 637 F.3d 558 (5th Cir. 2011) (petitioner must allege facts explaining why facility deficiencies actually prevented timely filing)