817 F.3d 319
7th Cir.2016Background
- Davis pleaded guilty (2010) to a drug conspiracy under a Rule 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement that required a sentence equal to 66% of the greater of the Guideline low-end or the statutory minimum.
- Parties anticipated a Guidelines range of 108–135 months and expected a sentence of ~80 months; plea agreement warned Guidelines calculations were preliminary and not a basis to withdraw the plea.
- Presentence investigation revealed additional military convictions and a less favorable criminal-history classification plus enhancements, producing a Guidelines range of 262–327 months.
- The government filed a §5K1.1 motion as promised and the district court sentenced Davis to 172 months (66% of the Guideline low end). Davis did not appeal.
- In 2014 Davis filed a pro se §2255 motion claiming (1) Alleyne error (judge-made facts increased statutory minimum), (2) ineffective assistance for misleading plea advice about the likely sentence, and (3) ineffective assistance for failing to file a notice of appeal.
- The district court dismissed the §2255 petition as untimely and because Alleyne had not been declared retroactive on collateral review; the Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Alleyne entitles Davis to §2255 relief because judge-found facts increased his statutory minimum | Davis: judge's criminal-history findings turned him ineligible for below-minimum sentence, implicating Alleyne | Government: heroin quantity (basis for 10-yr minimum) was charged and admitted; criminal-history findings fall under Almendarez-Torres; Alleyne not retroactive on collateral review | Court: Alleyne not retroactive on collateral review; claim fails |
| Whether Davis's plea was involuntary due to counsel's alleged misadvice about likely sentence | Davis: counsel grossly misinformed him and he would not have pleaded guilty otherwise | Government: plea agreement and written acknowledgments warned Guidelines were preliminary and not binding; waiver covers most challenges | Court: waiver and plea terms undermine involuntariness claim; independent timeliness grounds dispose of claim |
| Whether ineffective assistance for failure to file appeal warrants relief | Davis: counsel failed to file an appeal despite instruction | Government: defendant bears diligence in monitoring appeal; claim known or discoverable earlier and subject to §2255 limitations | Court: granted COA only on this claim for appeal, but overall §2255 was time-barred; no merit shown that discovery tolled limitation |
| Whether §2255 claims other than Alleyne are timely because Alleyne claim was timely | Davis: because Alleyne claim was filed within one year of Alleyne, related claims should be considered timely | Government: each §2255 claim’s timeliness is assessed independently; one timely claim cannot salvage otherwise untimely claims | Court: each claim’s deadline is independent; other claims are untimely and dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) (facts that increase statutory minimum must be submitted to jury)
- Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998) (prior-conviction findings may be treated as sentencing facts)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (other-than-authorized facts increasing penalty must be proved to a jury)
- Simpson v. United States, 721 F.3d 875 (7th Cir. 2013) (Alleyne not declared retroactive by Supreme Court; cannot be applied on collateral review)
- United States v. Long, 748 F.3d 322 (7th Cir. 2014) (Almendarez-Torres permits judge findings regarding prior convictions that trigger enhanced minimums)
- United States v. Block, 705 F.3d 755 (7th Cir. 2013) (background describing the drug organization)