United States v. Burson, 1:06-cr-00252

Burson, proceeding pro se with counsel, files a 28 U.S.C. §2255 motion alleging ineffective assistance by federal trial counsel during plea negotiations.
He contends counsel McIntyre gave incompetent advice about motions to suppress and the consequences of rejecting the government’s plea offer.
The government offered a plea with a 10-year minimum; trial would expose Burson to a 15-year mandatory minimum after a superseding indictment.
Burson rejected the plea and was convicted at trial, receiving a 15-year sentence.
Affidavits from Burson and his parents contrast with McIntyre’s affidavit; a dispute exists over what advice was given.
The court set an evidentiary hearing to determine the precise nature of counsel’s communications and whether prejudice occurred.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the plea-bargaining stage requires an evidentiary hearing.	Burson seeks an evidentiary hearing to resolve factual disputes about counsel's advice.	Government contends record shows reasonable representation; no hearing required.	Evidentiary hearing is warranted
Whether McIntyre’s advice to Burson about accepting the plea was deficient under Strickland.	Burson asserts counsel failed to adequately explain options and consequences.	Government asserts McIntyre explained pros/cons; performance not deficient.	Disputes require resolution at an evidentiary hearing
Whether Burson was prejudiced by counsel’s alleged deficient performance.	But-for counsel’s advice, Burson would have accepted a 10-year plea and avoided trial.	Prejudice cannot be determined without resolving credibility and evidentiary issues.	Prejudice to be determined after evidentiary hearing
Whether the court should reinstate the original plea offer if ineffective assistance is found.	Remedy could include reinstating the plea or similar relief to reflect the original offer.	Remedy not clearly established; procedural posture pending hearing.	Remedy to be addressed post-hearing

Carter v. United States, 130 F.3d 1432 (10th Cir. 1997) (advising client on plea options; considerations for prejudice with plea rejection)
Boria v. Keane, 99 F.3d 492 (2d Cir. 1996) (duty to discuss plea advisability; ineffective if attorney fails to advise)
Purdy v. United States, 208 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 2000) (need for defense counsel to give informed plea guidance while avoiding coercion)
Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708 (U.S. 1948) (counsel should offer informed opinion on pleas prior to trial)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (Strickland standard applied to guilty-plea context)
Williams v. Jones, 583 F.3d 1254 (10th Cir. 2009) (plea-process representation matters for prejudice analysis)