United States v. HOVIND
3:06-cr-00083
N.D. Fla.Jun 11, 2013Background
- Hovind was convicted on 58 counts of tax, structuring, and obstruction; sentenced to 120 months.
- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence; Supreme Court denied cert. in 2009.
- Hovind filed multiple Rule 60(b) motions and related pleadings; district court denied; appeals followed.
- He filed a first §2255 motion in 2010 which was deemed untimely; later motions followed.
- The current motion (doc. 454) is styled as an amended §2255 but is treated as second/successive; no circuit authorization has been obtained.
- The court held the motion either lacks jurisdiction as a successive motion or is untimely, and denied a certificate of appealability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the motion is a second/successive §2255 filing | Hovind treated it as an amendment | Motion is new, not properly authorized | Must be dismissed for lack of Eleventh Circuit authorization |
| Whether the motion is timely under §2255(f) | Equitable tolling due to loss of materials | Untimely even with tolling | Untimely; not tolled sufficiently to render timely |
| Whether a COA should issue | Entitled to appeal Merits | No substantial constitutional denial | Certificate of appealability denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651 (1996) (authorization required for second or successive §2255)
- United States v. Holt, 417 F.3d 1172 (11th Cir. 2005) (second or successive movant must obtain circuit leave)
- Carter v. United States, 405 F. App’x 409 (11th Cir. 2010) (procedural posture for successive §2255 motions)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (standards for COA issuance in §2255 disputes)