United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
ORDER DENYING MOVANT'S MOTION TO VACATE, SET
ASIDE, OR CORRECT SENTENCE 
J. TARNOW, SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
6, 2011, a jury convicted Movant Martin Tasis of: Health Care
Fraud Conspiracy (Count 1); Health Care Fraud (Counts 2-4);
Money Laundering Conspiracy (Count 5); Monday Laundering
(Count 6); and Conspiracy to Pay and Receive Kickbacks (Count
8). [Dkt. #75]. On October 20, 2011, the Court sentenced Mr.
Tasis to ten years on Counts 1-6 and five years on Count 8,
to be served concurrently. . Mr. Tasis did not file an
March 15, 2016, Mr. Tasis filed a Motion to Vacate, Set
Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 2255
. The Government filed a Response  on July 8, 2016.
Mr. Tasis filed a Reply  on August 5, 2016.
Movant's request for relief is time-barred, the Court
DENIES the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or
petitioner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is
bound by a one-year period of limitation. The limitations
period begins 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 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
exercise of due diligence.
28 U.S.C. § 2255(f).
for the purposes of § 2255(f)(1), “convictions
become final upon conclusion of direct review.”
Sanchez-Castellano v. United States, 358 F.3d 424,
426 (6th Cir. 2004). However, where a defendant does not file
an appeal, “the judgment becomes final upon the
expiration of the period in which the defendant could have
appealed to the court of appeals.” Id. at 427.
Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1), a defendant must file a
notice of appeal within fourteen days of the entry of
judgment. The district court may extend the appeal time by
thirty days where the defendant makes a showing of excusable
neglect or good cause. Sanchez-Castellano, 358 F.3d
Mr. Tasis did not file an appeal, his conviction became final
on November 3, 2011, fourteen days after the Court's
entry of judgment. To comply with the one-year statute of
limitations set forth in § 2255(f)(1), Mr. Tasis should
have filed his motion on or before November 3, 2012. Mr.
Tasis did not file this Motion until March 15, 2016, more
than four years after his conviction became final.
Accordingly, the Motion is untimely.
Tasis claims that his right to pursue appellate review was
abridged because his counsel rendered ineffective assistance
on his behalf. [154 at 12]. In essence, he submits that his
attorney's failure to file a requested appeal justifies
his delay in filing this § 2255 Motion. Mr. Tasis cites
to United States v. Munoz, 605 F.3d 359 (6th Cir.
2010) to support his argument that his counsel's
ineffective assistance satisfied the excusable neglect
standard. However, Munoz, which dealt with ...