United States v. Ball
3:17-cr-00337
S.D. Cal.Jan 14, 2019Background
- Vanessa Rojas pleaded guilty on April 4, 2017, to conspiracy to distribute heroin pursuant to a plea agreement.
- On October 10, 2017, she was sentenced to 80 months’ imprisonment and six years’ supervised release.
- Rojas filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition claiming ineffective assistance of counsel, asserting: she was not in the conspiracy, she was responsible for a smaller drug quantity, counsel failed to seek a minor-role reduction, and her criminal-history score was miscalculated.
- The plea agreement included an express waiver of the right to appeal or collaterally attack the sentence, except for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; Rojas made factual admissions under oath at her plea colloquy describing active participation and knowledge of at least one kilogram of heroin in the conspiracy.
- The district court found Rojas’s § 2255 allegations vague and conclusory, barred by waiver and by failure to raise issues on direct appeal, and—on the merits—unsupported by the record; therefore no evidentiary hearing was required.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of collateral-review waiver | Rojas claims ineffective assistance and other defects; contends her plea was not voluntary as to scope | Government points to clear plea-waiver that preserves only IAC claims; factual admissions at plea colloquy negate innocence claims | Waiver bars collateral attack on claims not truly IAC-related; plea colloquy statements defeat asserted innocence/quantity challenges |
| Ineffective assistance for plea decision / general counsel performance | Counsel gave unreasonable advice leading to an unknowing plea (unspecified) | Counsel’s performance presumed reasonable; Rojas gives no specifics showing deficient performance or prejudice | Dismissed for lack of specificity and failure to show deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland |
| Failure to seek minor-role adjustment at sentencing | Counsel should have requested a minor-role reduction | Record (texts, plea agreement) shows active participation—more than a courier—so a minor-role reduction was unlikely; strategic decision by counsel | No ineffective assistance: denial of minor-role relief would likely be affirmed; counsel’s choice was reasonable |
| Criminal history calculation / failure to appeal | Rojas contends prior convictions were wrongly counted and overstated her record; she did not appeal | Counsel moved for downward departure at sentencing and record lacks specifics from Rojas; failure to appeal bars collateral review absent cause and prejudice | Claims lack specificity, are barred by failure to appeal, and any error likely harmless given sentence was below the relevant mandatory minimum |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance standard requires deficiency and prejudice)
- Blackledge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63 (solemn plea colloquy statements carry strong presumption of verity)
- United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d 1257 (enforceability of plea-waivers)
- United States v. Pruitt, 32 F.3d 431 (ineffective-assistance claims may survive plea-waiver only when waiver validity challenged)
- Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon, 548 U.S. 331 (failure to raise claim on direct appeal bars collateral review absent cause and prejudice)
- United States v. Hurtado, 760 F.3d 1065 (minor-role reduction standards in drug cases)
- United States v. Rodriguez-Castro, 641 F.3d 1189 (minor-role determination is fact-specific)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (standard for certificate of appealability)