Lamar Blake v. United States, 814 F.3d 851

Lamar Blake pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute cocaine base and being a felon in possession of a firearm; plea did not waive right to appeal or §2255 relief.
Presentence report initially classified Blake as an armed career criminal; a supplemental report removed that classification but retained career-offender status; guidelines range calculated at 188–235 months.
At sentencing Blake received concurrent 216-month terms; the court advised him of his right to appeal. Blake did not file a direct appeal.
Nearly a year later Blake filed a §2255 motion alleging, among other claims, that his lawyer rendered ineffective assistance by failing to file a requested notice of appeal; Blake and counsel gave conflicting affidavits.
After an evidentiary hearing the district court found counsel credible and Blake not credible, denied the ineffective-assistance claim, but reduced the firearm count sentence to 120 months (concurrent) because Blake was not an armed career criminal.
The district court certified the ineffective-assistance claim for appeal; the Seventh Circuit reviewed whether the district court clearly erred in finding Blake had not asked counsel to appeal.

Issue	Blake's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to file a requested notice of appeal	Blake says he asked counsel multiple times (immediately after sentencing and during two jail visits) to file an appeal	Counsel testifies Blake never asked him to appeal; court found counsel credible	Affirmed: district court's credibility-based finding that Blake did not request an appeal was not clearly erroneous
Whether resentencing on firearm count affects appealability of the §2255 claim	Blake sought relief including reinstating appellate rights; argues preserved right to appeal plea validity	Government notes resentencing on firearm count does not moot the appeal of the §2255 ineffective-assistance claim	Court remanded only adjusted sentence on firearm count but held it does not alter resolution of the certified ineffective-assistance claim

Gant v. United States, 627 F.3d 677 (7th Cir. 2010) (movant must show he actually asked counsel to file an appeal to prevail on this variant of ineffective-assistance claim)
Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, N.C., 470 U.S. 564 (1985) (appellate court reviews credibility determinations for clear error; factfinder chooses between permissible views)
Ortiz v. Martinez, 789 F.3d 722 (7th Cir. 2015) (credibility findings overturned only when testimony is internally inconsistent, implausible, or contradicted by extrinsic evidence)
United States v. Williams, 216 F.3d 611 (7th Cir. 2000) (standards for overturning credibility determinations in ineffective-assistance contexts)
Furry v. United States, 712 F.3d 988 (7th Cir. 2013) (corroboration rules and the importance of supporting evidence in credibility contests)
White v. United States, 240 F.3d 656 (7th Cir. 2001) (factual findings not disturbed merely because appellate court would weigh evidence differently)