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.

Hull v. United States

September 3, 2008

KEVIN HAXEL HULL PETITIONER,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RESPONDENT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Joe Billy McDade United States District Judge

OPINION AND ORDER

Before the Court is Petitioner Kevin Haxel Hull's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Doc. 1], the Government's Response [Doc. 5], and Petitioner's Reply to the Government's Response [Doc. 17]. For the reasons that follow, Petitioner's § 2255 Motion is DENIED, all other pending Motions are MOOT.

I. BACKGROUND

Petitioner was successfully targeted during an online child pornography sting. On July 21, 2004, Petitioner was indicted and charged with two counts of Enticement of a Minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), two counts of Distribution of Child Pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2)(A), and one count of Possession of Child Pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(5)(B). (Govt.'s Resp. 4.) Counts Two, Four and Five were dismissed by motion of the Government. On January 21, 2005, Petitioner entered a guilty plea to one count of enticing a minor and one count of distribution of child pornography. This Court held a change of plea hearing and the following colloquy took place:

Q: Now have you fully discussed those charges and the case in general including any possible defenses that you may have with your attorney Mr. Bryning?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Are you fully satisfied with the counsel, representation and advice given to you in this case by Mr. Bryning?

A: Yes, sir. * * *

Q: Is anyone forcing you to plead guilty?

A: No.

Q: Are you pleading guilty voluntarily of your freewill?

A: Yes. (C.R. 24 at .5-7.)

Furthermore, the Court informed Hull that there would not be a trial and all of the rights associated with a trail would be waived, and Petitioner informed the Court that he understood that his rights at a trial would be waived. The Court further inquired to ensure the Petitioner was in fact guilty of the crime and asked Petitioner to explain his crime:

Q: ... what did you do?

A: On Count I corresponded on the internet via a chat room with an individual that was apparently a police officer.

Q: And for what purpose did you engage in this chat room conversation?

A: It was of a sexual nature.

Q: I'm sorry, what were you trying to do?

A: We discussed possibly meeting.

Q: Were you attempting to induce, entice this person to engage in ...


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.