Opinions and documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
-v- No. 12-cr-894-2 (RJS)
No. 23-cv-1973 (RJS)
No. 23-cv-544 (RJS)
HECTOR EMILIO FERNANDEZ-ROSA, ORDER
Defendant.
HECTOR EMILIO FERNANDEZ-ROSA,
Petitioner,
-v-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.
RICHARD J. SULLIVAN, Circuit Judge:
Hector Emilio Fernandez-Rosa, currently incarcerated and proceeding pro se, moves under
28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate or set aside his 2019 conviction and sentence following his guilty plea
to one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. By order dated
January 30, 2023 (Dkt. No. 12-cr-894-2, Doc. No. 94), the Court ordered Fernandez-Rosa to file
a declaration by March 30, 2023 to show cause as to why his section-2255 motion – which
purported to be dated October 30, 2022 but which was not received by the Court until January 19,
2023 (Dkt. No. 12-cr-894-2, Doc. No. 93; Dkt. No. 23-cv-544, Doc. No. 1) – should not be denied
as time-barred.
On March 6, 2023, the Court received a duplicative motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which
was purportedly dated August 29, 2022, bearing Fernandez-Rosa’s signature. (Dkt. No. 23-cv-
1973, Doc. No. 1.) Thereafter, Fernandez-Rosa submitted a declaration – dated March 28, 2023,
but not received by the Court until April 5, 2023 – asserting that he placed his initial motion into
the prison mail system on August 29, 2022. (Dkt. No. 12-cr-894-2, Doc. No. 99.) Fernandez-Rosa
also asserted that staff members at his facility “rejected the mail” containing his initial section-
2255 motion, prompting him to submit another motion into the prison mail system on October 30,
2022. (Id.)
It bears noting that, if the motions were put into the prison mail system on the dates
Fernandez-Rosa claims they were, the motions would be timely since Fernandez-Rosa had until
November 1, 2022 to submit a motion to vacate under section 2255.1 Nevertheless, given the self-
serving nature of Fernandez-Rosa’s assertions and the significant delays between when Fernandez-
Rosa claims to have mailed his motions and when they were actually received in the Clerk’s Office,
the Court remains concerned that the motions may be time-barred. For these reasons, the Court
requests further documentation from the parties to assess whether a hearing will be necessary to
determine the timeliness of Fernandez-Rosa’s motion.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Fernandez-Rosa shall file with the Court,
by July 17, 2023, documents and witness affidavits pertaining to when and how he mailed his
motions. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the government shall file its response to Fernandez-
Rosa’s submissions within ten days of the filing of those materials. All further papers filed or
submitted for filing must include the criminal docket number and will be docketed in the criminal
case – 12-cr-894 (RJS).
1 In a previous order (Dkt. No. 12-cr-894-2, Doc. No. 94), the Court stated that Fernandez-Rosa had until September 1,
2022 to file a timely section-2255 motion. The actual deadline, however, is November 1, 2022, in light of an order
issued by the United States Supreme Court during the COVID-19 pandemic, which temporarily extended the time to
petition for certiorari from 90 to 150 days. See 334 F.R.D. 804. Under the “prison mailbox” rule, documents submitted
by incarcerated individuals are generally deemed to be filed on the date that they are delivered to prison authorities
for mailing. See Noble v. Kelly, 246 F.3d 93, 97–98 (2d Cir. 2001).
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to Hector Emilio
Fernandez-Rosa, BOP ID # 92339-054, at either USP Terre Haute, P.O. Box 33, Terre Haute, IN
47808, or at any BOP institution to which Fernandez-Rosa should be subsequently transferred.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 16, 2023
New York, New York
RICHARD J. SULLIVAN
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT JUDGE
Sitting by Designation
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.