Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Miller

United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Southern Division

March 27, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
CHRISTINA MILLER DEFENDANT Civil No. 1:16cv164-HSO

          ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT CHRISTINA MILLER'S MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255 TO VACATE, SET ASIDE OR CORRECT SENTENCE [246]

          HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         BEFORE THE COURT is Defendant Christina Miller's Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence [246] filed May 13, 2016. Having considered the Motion, the record, and relevant legal authority, the Court finds that the Motion is not well taken and should be denied.

         I. BACKGROUND

         A. Defendant's Guilty Plea

         On November 5, 2014, a Grand Jury returned an eight-count Indictment [4] against Defendant Christina Miller (“Defendant”) and others, with Defendant named only in Count One. Indictment [4] at 1-6. Count One charged Defendant with conspiracy “to possess with intent to distribute actual methamphetamine, a Schedule II narcotic drug controlled substance, ” in violation of 21 U.S.C. §841(a)(1) and 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A). Indictment [4] at 1-2. On February 6, 2015, Defendant's counsel filed on her behalf a Notice of Intent to Change Plea [122]. Pursuant to a written Plea Agreement [130] and Plea Supplement *SEALED* [131] entered into with the Government on February 18, 2015, Defendant pleaded guilty to Count One of the Indictment in exchange for, among other things, the Government's recommendation that she be sentenced to the “lower 25% of the applicable guideline range.” Plea Suppl. *SEALED* [131] at 1.

         The written Plea Agreement [130] and Plea Supplement *SEALED* [131] (collectively, the “Plea Agreement”) detailed both Defendant's obligations and those of the Government. See Minute Entry, February 18, 2015. Pursuant to the Plea Agreement, Defendant expressly waived, with the exception of the right to raise ineffective assistance of counsel claims, “the right to appeal the conviction and sentence imposed in this case” and “the right to contest the conviction and sentence or the manner in which the sentence was imposed in any post-conviction proceeding, including but not limited to a motion brought under Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255 . . . .” Plea Agreement [31] at 4-5.

         On May 6, 2015, the Court sentenced Defendant to a term of 120 months imprisonment. See Minute Entry, May 6, 2015; J. [168] at 2. The Court entered the Judgment of Conviction [168] on May 8, 2015. Defendant did not file a direct appeal.

         B. Defendant's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion

         On May 13, 2016, Defendant's § 2255 Motion [246] was received and filed into the Court record. Defendant avers that she executed the Motion and placed it into the prison mailing system on May 6, 2016. Mot. [1] at 13. Defendant alleges that: (1) her court-appointed attorney was ineffective in failing to show evidence that she had no “input on the import of drugs” which resulted in her loss of “2 points for import, ” Mot. [1] at 4; (2) her sentence should be reduced because she was “less culpable” than her codefendants and her criminal conduct only amounted to “aberrant behavior, ” id. at 5; and (3) her sentence was improper under the “Guidelines” because it was “based on ‘hear-say' and facts not admitted by myself or proven, ” id. at 7.

         The Government filed its Response [248] on May 27, 2016, arguing that Defendant had waived her right to file a § 2255 Motion when she entered into the Plea Agreement. Resp. [248] at 1-4. Specifically, the Government points out in Paragraph 3 of its Response that Defendant waived certain rights.

         In the plea agreement entered into with the advice of counsel, Miller specifically waived her right to seek post-conviction relief in this case. As the agreement explicitly provides:

Defendant, knowing and understanding all of the matters aforesaid, including the maximum possible penalty that could be imposed, and being advised of Defendant's rights to remain silent, to trial by jury, to subpoena witnesses on Defendant's own behalf, to confront the witnesses against him, and to appeal the conviction and sentence, in exchange for the U.S. Attorney entering into this plea agreement and accompanying plea supplement, hereby expressly waives the following rights (except defendant reserves the right to raise ineffective assistance of counsel claims):
[. . .]
b. the right to contest the conviction and sentence or the manner in which the sentence was imposed in any post-conviction proceeding, including but not limited to a motion brought under Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255, and any type of proceeding claiming double jeopardy or excessive penalty ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.