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. Wallace

United States District Court, D. Oregon, Portland Division

July 18, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
JAMES MICHAEL WALLACE Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          Robert E. Jones, United States District Judge

         Defendant, James Wallace (Wallace), filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. [ECF # 23] Specifically, he moved to vacate the judgment in case 3:10-cr-00052-JO and to correct his sentence imposed under the career offender guideline, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 citing Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015). Thereafter, the government filed a motion to dismiss Wallace's motion citing Beckles v. United States, 137 S.Ct. 886 (2017). [ECF # 30] Because I find Beckles to be controlling precedent, I GRANT the government's motion to dismiss.

         STANDARDS

         Section 2255 permits a prisoner in custody to move the court that imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence on the ground that:

[T]he sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the court was without jurisdiction to impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral attack....

28 U.S.C. § 2255(a).

         Under Section 2255, "a district court must grant a hearing to determine the validity of a petition brought under that section '[u]nless the motions and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.'" United States v. Baylock, 20 F.3d 1458, 1465 (9th Cir. 1994) (emphasis in original) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2255). A motion pursuant to § 2255 must be filed within one year from the date on which a petitioner's conviction becomes final, unless an exception applies. Id. § 2255(f)(1). One exception provides that a motion is timely if (1) it "assert[s] ... [a] right. .. newly recognized by the Supreme Court," id. § 2255(f)(3), (2) it is filed within one year from "the date on which the right asserted was initially recognized by the Supreme Court," id. § 2255(f)(3), and (3) the Supreme Court or controlling Court of Appeals has declared the right retroactively applicable on collateral review, Dodd v. United States, 545 U.S. 353, 358-59 (2005). Only the Supreme Court may "recognize" a new right under § 2255(f)(3). Dodd, 545 U.S. at 357-59. In order to show that his or her claim relies on a new rule of constitutional law, a movant must show that "(1) he or she was sentenced in violation of the Constitution and that (2) the particular constitutional rule that was violated is 'new,' [and] was 'previously unavailable'" United States v. Geozos, 870 F.3d 890, 895 (9th Cir. 2017).

         BACKGROUND

         A. Defendant's Convictions and Sentencing

         In Case No. 3:10-cr-00052-JO, Wallace plead guilty to seven counts of unarmed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). In Case No. 3:11-cr-00075-JO, he plead guilty to attempting to escape the federal correctional facility. Pursuant to the plea agreements in these cases, the parties stipulated that Wallace qualified as a career offender under the United States Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines"), based on Wallace's earlier convictions for burglary in the first degree and unarmed bank robbery. The presentence reports also recommended that he be sentenced as a career offender.

         For sentencing in the seven bank robberies case, the career offender guideline produced a base offense level of 32 and a total offense level of 29 after a three level reduction for acceptance of responsibility. With a criminal history category VI, Wallace's advisory guideline range was 151-188 months. If the career offender guideline had not applied, the guideline range would have been 92-115 months with a total offense level of 26 and a criminal history category IV. I imposed a low range 151 month sentence.

         For sentencing in the attempted escape case, the career offender guideline produced a total offense level of 14 and a criminal history category VI (up from level 11 and category IV without the career offender enhancement) resulting in a guideline range of 37 - 46 months. Judge Brown varied below the career offender range and imposed a concurrent 24 month sentence.

         Wallace did not appeal his conviction or sentence in either case.

         B. Legal Developments: Johnson ...


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.