Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Alexander v. United States

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


November 20, 2008

DANIEL CLIFFORD ALEXANDER, PETITIONER/DEFENDANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Herndon, Chief Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Petitioner's motion for relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Without benefit of a plea agreement, Petitioner pleaded guilty to one count of bank robbery. On June 30, 2006, Petitioner was sentenced to 120 months imprisonment, three years supervised release, a fine of $500, restitution of $112, and a special assessment of $100. Less than a year later, Petitioner filed the instant motion under § 2255.

In his motion, Petitioner alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective. As basis for this claim, he first points to his sentencing recommendation agreement (Doc. 20, criminal case), in which counsel advised him to waive his right to appeal. Petitioner argues that such an agreement is not enforceable, and thus counsel should not have advised him to waive that right. Counsel subsequently refused to file a notice of appeal. Petitioner then argues that he should not have been sentenced as a career offender, and that such a challenge should have been raised by counsel on direct appeal. Petitioner later filed a motion to amend (Doc. 2), by which he wishes to incorporate an argument based upon the recent Supreme Court ruling in Cunningham v. California, 549 U.S. 270 (2007).

This motion is GRANTED.*fn1

The Court ORDERS the Government to file a response to Petitioner's motion within THIRTY (30) DAYS of the date of this Order. In its response, the Government shall first address whether the sentencing recommendation agreement is enforceable, including the provision in which Petitioner waived his right to appeal or collaterally attack his conviction or sentence. Assuming the Court finds that the agreement is not enforceable, the Government shall also address the merits of Petitioner's challenge to his sentence. The Government shall, as part of its response, attach all relevant portions of the record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DavidRHerndon CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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