United States v. Jeremy Dionne Norvell
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 18233
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- Norvell pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute oxycodone, oxymorphone, cocaine, and marijuana under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and 846.
- Norvell sought to withdraw his guilty plea claiming it was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, chiefly because he believed he was guaranteed attendance at Minnesota Teen Challenge before sentencing.
- Plea negotiations included multiple offers; a second superseding indictment added conspiracy and other charges, and the government sought to enhance penalties using a 1997 cocaine possession conviction.
- Norvell’s attorney discovered a misclassification that affected career-offender status, which influenced plea strategy and negotiations.
- Prior to sentencing, Norvell expressed a strong desire to attend Teen Challenge; testimony at the motion hearing disputed whether attendance was a condition of the plea.
- The district court conducted Rule 11 inquiry, found Norvell understood Teen Challenge was not part of the sentence, and Norvell was sentenced to 188 months, top of the estimates.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the denial of withdrawal of guilty plea was an abuse of discretion | Norvell argues misunderstanding about Teen Challenge invalidates plea | The court properly advised that Teen Challenge was not guaranteed in sentence | Denial affirmed |
| Whether counsel provided ineffective assistance during plea negotiations | Cornwell’s miscalculation and Lafler-related issues render plea invalid | Counsel’s performance was not deficient or prejudicial; Lafler does not apply | No relief; no ineffective assistance |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Cruz, 643 F.3d 639 (8th Cir. 2011) (abuse-of-discretion standard for withdrawal of guilty plea)
- United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824 (8th Cir. 2006) (fair-and-just-reason factors for withdrawal guidance)
- United States v. Nichols, 986 F.2d 1199 (8th Cir. 1993) (considerations for withdrawal after a guilty plea)
- United States v. Wicker, 80 F.3d 263 (8th Cir. 1996) (prejudice considerations in withdrawal decisions)
- United States v. Thomas, 705 F.3d 832 (8th Cir. 2013) (misunderstanding of sentencing guidelines does not alone void a plea)
- Lafler v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1376 (U.S. 2012) (ineffective assistance where counsel misadvises about plea offers)
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010) (Sixth Amendment right to counsel includes advice on immigration consequences; broader effective-assistance context)
- United States v. Leach, 562 F.3d 930 (8th Cir. 2009) (integration clause generally bars oral promises outside plea agreement)
- United States v. Meeks, 639 F.3d 522 (8th Cir. 2011) (elements of conspiracy and sufficiency of evidence for plea basis)