United States v. Conley, 5:21-cr-00767

Petitioner Mickey A. Conley filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his federal conviction and sentence.
Conley asserted two grounds: (1) counsel never received or reviewed discovery before Conley entered a guilty plea (framed as a due process/Fifth Amendment issue but argued as ineffective assistance), and (2) pre‑indictment delay of about 16 months violated his due process rights.
Defense counsel filed a notice requesting discovery on November 10, 2021; the Court issued a November 4, 2021 order reminding the Government of Brady obligations.
At the change‑of‑plea hearing, Conley admitted under oath that he and counsel had adequate time to review the Government’s case and were ready to plead guilty.
The Court found Conley failed to show deficient performance or prejudice under Strickland for the discovery claim, and Conley alleged no actual prejudice from the pre‑indictment delay; the § 2255 motion was denied.
The Court denied related motions as moot, and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and no certificate of appealability should issue.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance for failure to review discovery	Conley: counsel never received/reviewed discovery before plea, violating due process and rendering counsel ineffective	Government/Court: counsel requested discovery; Court reminded Government of Brady; Conley admitted he had time to review and was ready to plead	Denied — record shows counsel requested discovery and Conley admitted adequate time; no deficient performance shown
Pre‑indictment delay	Conley: ~16‑month delay between conduct and indictment violated due process	Government/Court: pre‑indictment delay requires actual prejudice to the defense and defendant bears burden to show it	Denied — Conley alleged no actual prejudice and thus failed to meet the burden

Gall v. United States, 21 F.3d 107 (6th Cir. 1994) (describing standard for § 2255 relief for fundamental defects)
Griffin v. United States, 330 F.3d 733 (6th Cir. 2003) (requires showing of constitutional error with substantial and injurious effect)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two‑prong ineffective assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
United States v. Morrow, 977 F.2d 222 (6th Cir. 1992) (describing prejudice as counsel’s errors causing probable defeat where defendant would likely have prevailed)
United States v. Lawson, 780 F.2d 535 (6th Cir. 1985) (defendant must demonstrate actual prejudice from pre‑indictment delay)