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.

Chisolm v. United States

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Beaufort Division

November 17, 2016

Wesley Chisolm, Petitioner,
v.
United States of America, Respondent.

          ORDER

          PATRICK MICHAEL DUFFY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Wesley Chisolm has filed a pro se motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his federal prison sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (ECF No. 1276). The United States (“Government”) has filed a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 1291). For the reasons stated herein, the Court grants the Government's motion.

         BACKGROUND

         In 2001, Chisolm pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute more than fifty grams of crack cocaine. When Chisolm pled guilty, his criminal history included prior convictions in South Carolina state court for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and distribution of crack. Due to those convictions, the Court treated him as a career offender under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, see U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1, and sentenced him to 292 months in prison. Chisolm did not appeal.[1]

         Chisolm filed his § 2255 motion in June 2016. The Government responded by filing its motion to dismiss. Chisolm then filed a response to the Government's motion. Accordingly, this matter is now ripe for consideration.

         APPLICABLE LAW

         Petitioner proceeds under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which provides, in relevant part:

A prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress claiming the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States . . . may move the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct the sentence.

28 U.S.C. § 2255(a). On a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence under § 2255, the petitioner bears the burden of proving the grounds for collateral attack by a preponderance of the evidence. Miller v. United States, 261 F.2d 546, 547 (4th Cir. 1958). In deciding a § 2255 motion, the district court need not hold a hearing if “the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(b).

         In conducting its review, this Court is mindful that pro se filings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by attorneys, Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978), and that federal courts must construe such pleadings liberally to allow the development of potentially meritorious claims, see Hughes v. Rowe, 449 U.S. 5, 9 (1980) (per curiam). The liberal construction requirement, however, does not mean courts can ignore a clear failure to allege facts that set forth claims cognizable in federal district court. See Weller v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 901 F.2d 387, 391 (4th Cir. 1990).

         DISCUSSION

         Chisolm raises three claims: (1) his career-offender designation is unconstitutional under Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015); (2) his plea counsel provided ineffective assistance; and (3) this Court improperly treated the Sentencing Guidelines as mandatory. The Government argues the first claim is without merit and the latter two claims are untimely. For the following reasons, the Court agrees with the Government.

         I. J ...


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.