Thomas Vitrano v. United States, 721 F.3d 802

Vitrano pled guilty to felon in possession of a firearm and possessing a firearm while subject to a domestic abuse injunction; he received 120 months’ imprisonment.
The government asserted ACCA warrants a minimum of 180 months due to three prior “violent felony” convictions; we remanded for resentencing.
Vitrano’s §2255 motion (2008) alleged Fifth Amendment violations, ineffective assistance, and sentencing under ACCA; he later claimed discharge certificates could render his prior convictions non-countable.
Forensic testing showed both discharge certificates were fake; Vitrano was indicted for perjury and related offenses; proceedings on §2255 were held in abeyance.
On remand, the district court denied Vitrano’s motion to amend as an unauthorized second or successive petition; Vitrano did not file a reply supporting his original motion, and instead dismissed the original claims later.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused its discretion denying the motion to amend §2255	Vitrano argues amendment was in good faith to present Begay/Chambers-based claims	Government says amendment is a vehicle to bypass AEDPA and relitigate fraudulently abandoned claims	No abuse; amendment was a bad-faith attempt to supplant the original petition and evade AEDPA limits
Whether the district court properly analyzed bad faith/dilatory motive	Vitrano contends no bad faith in seeking amendment	Amendment sought to replace original claims and evade merits adjudication	District court properly found bad faith/dilatory motive and within discretion to deny
Whether the amended claims were timely under AEDPA	Begay-related rights could be applied to delay the timing window	Begay recognized rights but amendment filed after one year is untimely	Untimely under 28 U.S.C. §2255(f)(3); district court’s denial also supported by futility
Whether the district court’s decision was consistent with AEDPA’s limitation on second/successive petitions	Amendment could add Begay/Chambers theories	Amendment would be an improper second/successive petition	Affirmed; denial within bounds of AEDPA constraints and district court discretion

Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (Supreme Court 2008) (definition of violent felony for ACCA)
Chambers v. United States, 555 U.S. 122 (Supreme Court 2009) (limitations on ACCA violence theory; inaction vs. intent)
Templeton v. United States, 543 F.3d 378 (7th Cir. 2008) (context for Begay/Chambers line of analysis)
Jones v. United States, 689 F.3d 696 (7th Cir. 2012) (notes Begay/Chambers framework in Seventh Circuit)
Narvaez v. United States, 674 F.3d 621 (7th Cir. 2011) (timing of Begay-related rights for collateral review)