is tolled by the timely filing of an indictment, and a properly sealed indictment “is timely even though the defendant is not arrested and the indictment is not made public until after the end of the statutory limitations period.” United States v. Edwards, 777 F.2d 644, 647 (11th Cir.1985). An indictment may be sealed for reasons beyond locating and gaining custody over the defendant, including public interest, sound reasons of policy, or other sufficient reason. See id. at 647-648 (quoting United States v. Southland, 760 F.2d 1366 (2d Cir.1985) and discussing reasons for sealing). Moreover, “[cjourts have dismissed indictments maintained under seal beyond the limitation period only upon a showing of substantial, irreparable, actual prejudice to the defendants.” See id. at 649 (<HOLDING>). The district court did not err when it
holding that there was no ineffective assistance due to appellate counsels failure to challenge the trial courts denial of the motion to change venue because the defendant failed to show actual prejudice holding that to show actual prejudice petitioner must show that the errors at trial worked to his actual and substantial disadvantage infecting his entire trial with error of constitutional dimensions holding that a defendant must show actual prejudice to succeed on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim holding that the defendants failed to show the inaccessibility of witnesses the diminution of memories or other indicia of actual prejudice holding that a defendant must not only show actual prejudice as opposed to mere speculative prejudice  but also  any actual prejudice was substantial  that he was meaningfully impaired in his ability to defend against the states charges to such an extent that the disposition of the criminal proceeding was likely affected