Section 2255 Motions in Missouri: Deadline, Grounds, and Process

A motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is how a person serving a federal sentence asks the court that sentenced them to vacate, set aside, or correct it. For most people it is the one real chance, after the direct appeal, to raise problems that never made it into the trial record, above all a claim that their own lawyer failed them.

This guide covers the deadline, what can be raised, and how a § 2255 motion moves through the Eastern and Western Districts of Missouri and the Eighth Circuit. The process is the same in both districts.

In practice, most § 2255 motions are built on ineffective assistance of counsel. The Supreme Court has held that these claims may be brought in a § 2255 motion whether or not they were raised on direct appeal, because they usually depend on facts outside the trial record (Massaro v. United States, 2003). The standard is the familiar two-part test from Strickland v. Washington: the lawyer’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and there is a reasonable probability the result would have been different without the errors.

Common § 2255 claims include:

• Failure to file a requested appeal. If you told your lawyer to file a notice of appeal and they did not, prejudice is presumed, even if your plea agreement contained an appeal waiver (Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 2000; Garza v. Idaho, 2019).
• Bad advice about a plea. Misadvice about the sentencing exposure, or failure to communicate a formal plea offer.
• Sentencing errors counsel failed to fight. A wrong guideline calculation, a criminal history mistake, or a sentence enhancement that should have been challenged.
• Failure to investigate or to file a suppression motion that had a real chance of success.
• A sentence above the statutory maximum, or a prior conviction used to enhance the sentence that no longer qualifies.

More on the standard itself: ineffective assistance of counsel. Other ways to shorten a federal sentence: compassionate release and retroactive amendments.

• Claims that could have been raised on direct appeal but were not are generally procedurally defaulted, unless the person can show cause and prejudice or actual innocence. Ineffective assistance is the main exception.
• Claims already decided on direct appeal generally cannot be relitigated.
• Claims covered by a waiver. Most federal plea agreements include waivers of appeal and post-conviction rights. Whether a particular claim survives depends on the exact language of the agreement; ineffective assistance claims are commonly carved out, but not always in the same way.

Under § 2255(h), the court of appeals will authorize a second motion only for newly discovered evidence that would establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found the person guilty, or for a new rule of constitutional law that the Supreme Court has made retroactive. Very few people qualify.

That is the strongest reason to get the first motion right. Every claim has to be in it, fully supported, and filed on time. A motion written quickly on the standard form, with claims stated in a sentence each, uses up the one opportunity most people will get.

A § 2255 motion is for federal sentences and is filed in the court that imposed the sentence. A person challenging a Missouri state conviction in federal court files a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 instead, after first using the state process, which in Missouri usually means a Rule 29.15 or Rule 24.035 motion. The two have different rules and different deadlines.

See federal habeas corpus, and for state cases, the Rule 29.15 and Rule 24.035 guides.