United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Western Division
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
Scott Coogler, United States District Judge
Tashona Patrice Morrow (“Morrow) has filed with this
Court a motion to vacate her sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255. (Doc. 1.) Morrow contends that Amendment 794 to
United States Sentencing Guidelines (“U.S.S.G.”)
§ 3B1.2, which took effect November 1, 2015, after her
sentencing, makes her eligible for a mitigation role
reduction to her sentence. The Government opposes the motion.
(Doc. 4.) Morrow has also filed a reply in support. (Doc. 5.)
For the following reasons, the motion is due to be denied.
August 27, 2014, a grand jury sitting in the Northern
District of Alabama returned a five-count Superseding
Indictment against Morrow and two co- defendants. Only Count
One of the Superseding Indictment pertained to Morrow,
charging her and another co-defendant (her son) with armed
bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and
October 8, 2014, Morrow entered a guilty plea to Count One of
the Superseding Indictment pursuant to a plea agreement.
Subject to limited exceptions, she agreed to waive her right
to appeal her conviction and/or sentence and to challenge her
conviction and/or sentence or the manner in which her
conviction and/or sentence was determined in any
post-conviction proceeding, including a motion brought under
28 U.S.C. § 2255.
presentence investigation report was prepared which
delineated no adjustment for Morrow's role in the offense
of conviction. Morrow, through her appointed counsel, filed
objections to the presentence investigation report and also
submitted a sentencing memorandum, but neither pleading
mentioned a mitigating role adjustment pursuant to U.S.S.G.
§ 3B1.2. The Court held a sentencing hearing and on
February 17, 2015, a judgment of conviction was entered
sentencing Morrow to a custodial term of 75 months.
did not appeal. On August 7, 2016, she filed the instant
habeas motion. She remains in custody.
The Petition is Time-Barred
Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act
(“AEDPA”) provides for a one-year period in which
a motion for post-conviction relief under § 2255 must be
filed. Under the AEDPA, the one-year period in which to file
a motion under § 2255 begins to run from the latest of
(1) the date on which the judgment of conviction becomes
(2) the date on which the impediment to making a motion
created by governmental action in violation of the
Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the
movant was prevented from making such a motion by such
(3) the date on which the right asserted was initially
recognized by the Supreme Court, if that right has been newly
recognized by the Supreme Court and made retroactively
applicable to cases on collateral review; or
(4) the date on which the facts supporting the claim or
claims presented could have been discovered through the