On this page
In most cases, finish your direct appeal before you file a § 2255 motion. Courts usually will not decide a § 2255 motion while the appeal is pending. And issues you could have raised on appeal but did not are often blocked later.
Most people worry about filing too late, and they should — the one-year deadline in § 2255(f) is strict. But you can also file too early.
Outcomes vary. A past result does not predict or guarantee the outcome of any other case.
What is “exhaustion” for state prisoners?
For state prisoners, exhaustion is required by statute. Before seeking federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, a state prisoner generally must first give the state courts a full chance to decide the claims. 28 U.S.C. § 2254(b)(1). There is no matching statute for federal prisoners under § 2255.
Why does exhaustion still matter for federal prisoners?
Even without a statute, you should usually finish your direct appeal before filing a § 2255 motion. There are two reasons.
Reason 1: Courts usually won’t hear a § 2255 motion during an appeal
Many courts will not decide a § 2255 motion while the direct appeal is pending. The concern is wasted effort, not power. As the Second Circuit put it, “[t]here is no jurisdictional bar to a district court’s adjudication of a §2255 motion during the pendency of a direct appeal.” Instead, the concern is “one of judicial economy and the concern that the results on direct appeal may make the district court’s efforts on the §2255 motion a nullity.” United States v. Outen, 286 F.3d 622, 632 (2d Cir. 2002).
Most often, the district court dismisses the early motion without prejudice, meaning you can file again later. In some cases, the appeals court may decide it has lost jurisdiction and dismiss the appeal. Sometimes the appeals court simply puts the appeal on hold until the § 2255 motion is decided. Courts handle this differently, so check the rule in your circuit.
When can a § 2255 motion go forward during an appeal?
Rarely. In United States v. Prows, 448 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2006), the court allowed both to proceed at once because of the “complete dichotomy between the issues raised by the government on direct appeal and those raised by Mr. Prows in his §2255 motion, as well as the fact that the government could effectively keep Mr. Prows in custody for years while it exercises its appellate rights.”
Reason 2: The procedural default doctrine
The bigger reason is “procedural default.” The general rule is that a § 2255 motion “will not be allowed to do service for an appeal.” Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614, 621 (1998).
In plain terms: if you could have raised a claim on direct appeal but did not, a court usually will not hear it in a § 2255 motion — unless you show “cause and prejudice” or actual innocence. Id. at 622.
The big exception is ineffective assistance of counsel. Those claims can be raised for the first time in a § 2255 motion. Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500, 504 (2003). Read more on the procedural default page.
Common questions
I was convicted in state court. Can I file a § 2255 motion?
No. Section 2255 is only for federal convictions. State prisoners who want federal habeas relief must use 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
What does it mean for a federal prisoner to “exhaust” a claim?
In the § 2255 context, it means raising the claim on direct appeal before filing a § 2255 motion, when the claim could be raised there. Many claims — like most ineffective-assistance claims — depend on facts outside the trial record and cannot really be raised on appeal. Those claims are not barred for failure to raise them on appeal.
What is the procedural default doctrine?
It blocks a § 2255 claim that could have been raised on direct appeal but was not, unless you show cause and prejudice or actual innocence. Separately, courts generally will not let you re-argue in a § 2255 motion a claim the appeals court already decided against you.
If you have questions about when to file, book a consultation with Brandon Sample.
Related pages
You Must be “In Custody” to File a Section 2255 Motion
Section 2255 Motions: The Statute of Limitations
Equitable Tolling Applies to the Section 2255 Statute of Limitations
Actual Innocence Can Overcome the Section 2255 Statute of Limitations
Section 2255(f)(3): A Newly Recognized Right Restarts the One-Year Clock
Section 2255(f)(4): Newly Discovered Evidence Restarts the One-Year Clock
Questions about your case? Book a consultation to talk it through with Brandon Sample.