United States v. Robert Wade

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMay 21, 1999
Docket98-3467
StatusPublished

This text of United States v. Robert Wade (United States v. Robert Wade) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Robert Wade, (8th Cir. 1999).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _____________

No. 98-3467NI _____________

United States of America, * * Appellee, * * On Appeal from the United v. * States District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. * Robert Wade, * [To be published] * Appellant. * ___________

Submitted: May 11, 1999 Filed: May 21, 1999 ___________

Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, JOHN R. GIBSON, and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

This is a proceeding under 28 U.S.C. §2255 in which the appellant, Robert Wade, seeks to have his conviction on drug charges set aside. The conviction was previously affirmed on direct appeal. See United States v. Wade, 1992 W.L. 301953 (8th Cir., October 23, 1992) (No. 92-2173).

Mr. Wade's major arguments have to do with the performance of his counsel at the time of sentencing. This performance, he says, was deficient, and the deficiency was such as to undermine confidence in the outcome of the sentencing proceedings. Both a Magistrate Judge1 and the District Court2 have written thorough opinions painstakingly examining each of the arguments advanced by Wade. We have nothing of substance to add, and see no reason to encumber the record with still another detailed discussion of the parties' contentions. Accordingly, the judgment will be affirmed on the basis of the District Court's opinion.

In addition to the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims and certain other arguments, defendant makes an Ex Post Facto Clause argument, claiming that Guidelines §3B1.1, as it existed at the time of the commission of the offense, did not allow consideration of relevant conduct in connection with a defendant's role in the offense. This argument is foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Larson, 110 F.3d 620, 627 n.8 (8th Cir. 1997).

Affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

1 The Hon. John A. Jarvey, United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. 2 The Hon. David R. Hansen, United States Circuit Judge for the Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation. -2-

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

Related

United States v. Peter Larson
110 F.3d 620 (Eighth Circuit, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Robert Wade, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-robert-wade-ca8-1999.