United States District Court, S.D. Illinois
MARTY C. STACY, Petitioner,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
matter comes before the Court on petitioner Marty Stacy's
Motion (Doc. 1) to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct his sentence
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The government filed a
timely response (Doc. 11) and the petitioner filed a reply
(Doc. 14). Petitioner also filed an amendment (Doc. 2) and an
amended Ground Nine (Doc. 5). For the following reasons,
Petitioner's motion is denied.
25, 2013, Marty C. Stacy was found guilty at trial of four
counts of possession of pseudoephedrine knowing it would be
used to manufacture methamphetamine and one count of
conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. He was sentence on
November 1, 2013, to a term of imprisonment of 336 months on
the conspiracy charge and 240 months on each of the
possession charges - all counts to run concurrent with each
other. He was further sentenced to eight years of supervised
release, a fine of $250.00, and a special assessment of
$500.00. See United States v. Stacy, 12-cr-40094,
Docs. 90 & 110.
appealed his conviction and sentence which were affirmed by
the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on
October 20, 2014. He then filed a petition for en
banc rehearing which was denied on December 24, 2014.
See United States of America v. Stacy, 769 F.2d 969
(7th Cir. 2014).
brings this 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition alleging the
1. Relevant conduct and unjust sentence in that the original
indictment gave a time frame of 8-14-2010 to 5-30-2012 and
the superseding indictment had four specific dates. As he was
found guilty of the charges in the superseding indictment,
the amount of pseudoephedrine should have been limited to
those specific four days.
2. Ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, prosecutorial
misconduct, in that his counsel did not strike juror Gordon
even though the Judge acknowledged and notified the parties
that he knew juror Gordon and appellate counsel refused to
raise issue on appeal.
3. Prosecutorial misconduct, plain error, in that the
Prosecutor's closing arguments included instructions as
to reasonable doubt.
4. Denial of due process, in that opening and closing
arguments were not included in the transcripts for the record
5. Ineffective assistance of counsel against Burton H.
Shostak for failing to pursue a speedy trial resulting in the
government filing a superseding indictment.
6. Ineffective assistance of counsel against Ronald E.
Jenkins for actions pretrial and at trial.
7. Ineffective assistance of counsel against Peter Henderson,
appellate counsel, for failing to raise the issues Petitioner
requested be raised on appeal and proceeding with an appeal
without a complete transcript.
8. Ineffective assistance of counsel against Ronald E.
Jenkins for failing to raise a chain of custody issue in the
Motion to Suppress Evidence.
9. Ineffective assistance of counsel against Ronald E.
Jenkins for failing to withdraw as counsel after Petitioner
requested him to withdraw.
Petitioner's Amendment was filed four days prior to this
Court's Memorandum and Order (Doc. 3) and
Petitioner's Amended Ground Nine was filed approximately
two weeks after the Memorandum and Order. The Memorandum and
Order directed the parties to refer to the claims as outlined
in the memorandum. However, in these additional documents,
petitioner identified a new Ground Nine - Inadmissible
evidence denying the right to a fair trial, confrontation,
and due process. As such, Ground Nine as identified in the
Court's Memorandum is different from the Ground Nine
identified by the petitioner. Therefore, the relevant
portions of the Amendment Ground Nine have been address
within the appropriate areas of the issues identified in the
Court's Memorandum and Order.