2:12-cv-05631
E.D.N.YApr 8, 2013Background
- Petitioner Peter Paul pleaded guilty in March 2005 to one count of securities fraud and waived the right to appeal so long as the sentence did not exceed 120 months.
- Paul was sentenced on June 25, 2009 to 120 months’ imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and restitution exceeding $3.8 million to Merrill Lynch and over $7.6 million to Spear, Leeds & Kellogg.
- He received credit for time served in a Brazilian prison but not for time served on pretrial home detention.
- The Second Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence after reviewing issues raised on appeal, including Rule 11, speedy sentencing, and restitution, finding them meritless or waived.
- Paul filed a habeas petition and a subsequent 2255 petition challenging (inter alia) home detention credit, Rule 11 participation, speedy rights, sentence reasonableness, treaty compliance, and effective assistance of counsel.
- The district court denied the 2255 petition, concluding the grounds were waived, previously decided, or lack merit, and no evidentiary hearing was warranted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waiver and collateral attack | Paul argues grounds are not barred by waiver and seeks relief via 2255. | Waiver in the guilty plea forecloses collateral challenges within the waived scope. | Waiver bars relief; petition denied on waiver grounds. |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel resulting in involuntary plea | Counsel's performance fell short, rendering the plea involuntary. | Counsel adequately advised; no prejudice shown; plea voluntary. | No ineffective assistance; Strickland standard not met; plea voluntary. |
| Credit for time served on home detention | Entitled to credit for pretrial home confinement. | No such credit; already adjudicated by courts. | Not entitled to credit; argument frivolous and rejected. |
| Extradition treaty and supervised release | Three-year supervised release violates the Brazil extradition treaty. | Treaty does not require passport release or limit supervised release. | Treaty not violated; no automatic passport or release rights. |
| Rule 11 and plea negotiations / speedy sentencing / restitution | Counsel's handling of plea negotiations and speedy aspects violated rights. | Claims previously decided or waived; no merit. | Claims barred by waiver or res judicata; asserted errors not merit-worthy. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Garcia, 166 F.3d 519 (2d Cir. 1999) (waiver of appellate rights after guilty plea; collateral attack limitations)
- Parisi v. United States, 529 F.3d 134 (2d Cir. 2008) (ineffective assistance - voluntary guilty plea standard)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Harrington v. United States, 689 F.3d 124 (2d Cir. 2012) (strong presumption of reasonable professional assistance)
- Puglisi v. United States, 586 F.3d 209 (2d Cir. 2009) (hearing required only when a plausible ineffective-assistance claim is stated)