Cox v. United States

E.D. Texas

Cox v. United States

District Court, E.D. Texas·Decided August 16, 2019·No. 4:18-cv-00237·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MICHAEL WARREN COX, JR., #20960-078§ § versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-237 § CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 4:13-CR-45(01) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § ORDER OF DISMISSAL The above-styled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Kimberly C. Priest Johnson, who issued a Report and Recommendation concluding that Movant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (#1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 should be denied. Movant has filed objections. Movant alleges that he is entitled to relief because his plea of guilty was not entered knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily due to ineffective assistance of counsel. At the time Movant pled guilty, he advised the Court that he was pleading knowingly, freely and voluntarily upon the advice of counsel. His “solemn declarations in open court carry a strong presumption of verity.” United States v. Lampazianie, 251 F.3d 519, 524 (5th Cir. 2001) (quoting Blackedge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 73-74 (1977)). He has not provided evidence to overcome the presumption. Furthermore, with respect to his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, he has not shown that his attorney’s representation was deficient or that he was prejudiced by deficient representation, as required by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688 (1984).

The Report of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration. Having made a de novo review of the objections raised by Movant to the Report, the Court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the objections of Movant are without merit. It is accordingly ORDERED that the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED, and the case is DISMISSED with prejudice. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. All motions by either party not previously ruled upon are DENIED.

Signed this date Aug 16, 2019

MARCIA A. CRONE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MICHAEL WARREN COX, JR., #20960-078§ § versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-237 § CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 4:13-CR-45(01) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § ORDER OF DISMISSAL The above-styled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Kimberly C. Priest Johnson, who issued a Report and Recommendation concluding that Movant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (#1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 should be denied. Movant has filed objections. Movant alleges that he is entitled to relief because his plea of guilty was not entered knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily due to ineffective assistance of counsel. At the time Movant pled guilty, he advised the Court that he was pleading knowingly, freely and voluntarily upon the advice of counsel. His “solemn declarations in open court carry a strong presumption of verity.” United States v. Lampazianie, 251 F.3d 519, 524 (5th Cir. 2001) (quoting Blackedge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 73-74 (1977)). He has not provided evidence to overcome the presumption. Furthermore, with respect to his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, he has not shown that his attorney’s representation was deficient or that he was prejudiced by deficient representation, as required by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688 (1984).

The Report of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration. Having made a de novo review of the objections raised by Movant to the Report, the Court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the objections of Movant are without merit. It is accordingly ORDERED that the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED, and the case is DISMISSED with prejudice. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. All motions by either party not previously ruled upon are DENIED.

Signed this date Aug 16, 2019

MARCIA A. CRONE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cox v. United States, (E.D. Tex. 2019).

Pincite

Cox v. United States (Cox v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related