Mark Joseph Harvey v. United States, 674 F. App'x 865

In 2008 an FBI undercover agent used Gigatribe to download child pornography from user “LGFAPPER.” Network monitoring linked LGFAPPER’s IP addresses to an account registered to Mark Harvey at his residence.
A detective observed Harvey entering his home carrying a laptop-style bag. The FBI obtained a warrant and executed it at 6:05 a.m.; agents found a laptop and external hard drive under Harvey’s bed.
During the search agents questioned Harvey in his home (he was not Mirandized then); after repeated questioning he admitted ownership of the laptop and use of the LGFAPPER account. A preliminary forensic exam showed child pornography and an active download.
Agents stopped on-scene questioning and transported Harvey to the station, Mirandized him, and obtained written and oral confessions. Forensic analysis later recovered over 100,000 images and hundreds of videos. Harvey’s trial counsel did not move to suppress the pretrial statements.
Harvey pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement that avoided potential additional, higher-count charges and secured a government recommendation for acceptance-of-responsibility. He was sentenced to 480 months. He later filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion alleging ineffective assistance for failing to investigate/seek suppression of statements and that counsel’s ineffectiveness rendered his plea involuntary. The district court denied the § 2255 motion without an evidentiary hearing; this appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court erred by denying a § 2255 hearing on an ineffective-assistance claim for failing to investigate and move to suppress pretrial statements	Harvey: counsel was ineffective for not investigating/suppressing pretrial statements and that counsel’s failure prejudiced him (would have rejected plea and gone to trial)	Government: record (warrant, IP linkage, observed laptop, on-scene download, and massive forensic evidence) conclusively shows suppression would not change outcome; no prejudice	Affirmed — no hearing required because record conclusively shows Harvey cannot prevail on prejudice prong
Whether counsel’s alleged ineffective assistance rendered Harvey’s plea involuntary	Harvey: but for counsel’s errors he would not have pleaded guilty; plea was involuntary	Government: same as above — overwhelming independent evidence made rejecting the plea irrational; ineffective assistance not shown	Affirmed — plea involuntariness claim fails on ineffective-assistance standard; no hearing required

Winthrop-Redin v. United States, 767 F.3d 1210 (11th Cir. 2014) (standard for granting a § 2255 evidentiary hearing)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance test)
Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012) (prejudice in plea context requires reasonable probability defendant would have gone to trial)
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (rationality standard for rejecting plea based on counsel’s advice)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (ineffective assistance standard applied to plea challenges)