United States v. VEAL, 5:22-cr-00006-TES-CHW

Tamara Hall was indicted, along with co-defendants, for methamphetamine-related offenses, including conspiracy to distribute, distribution, and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute.
Hall pleaded guilty to a single conspiracy count pursuant to a plea agreement and was sentenced to 210 months in prison, consecutive to any state sentence.
Following sentencing, Hall filed a Section 2255 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, asserting only that her attorney should be held accountable for ineffectiveness, without further detail.
The court ordered Hall to amend her motion to specify her grounds and support them with factual detail; she did not do so despite being given multiple opportunities.
The government responded to the motion, but Hall did not file anything further, and her petition remained conclusory and unsupported by facts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance claim	Counsel was ineffective (no details)	No specifics pled; no viable claim	Denied—conclusory allegations insufficient under law
Basis for relief under § 2255	Sentence should be vacated/set aside	Motion is meritless on the record	No legal or factual basis for relief under § 2255
Requirement to amend petition	Sufficient to state claim as filed	No facts or specifics provided	Failure to amend; claim remains unsupported and denied
Certificate of appealability	Entitled to appeal	No substantial showing of violation	Denied—no substantial showing of constitutional denial

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes the two-pronged test for ineffective assistance of counsel: deficient performance and prejudice)
Wilson v. United States, 962 F.2d 996 (11th Cir. 1992) (conclusory allegations, unsupported by specifics, are insufficient for ineffective assistance claims)
Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (standard for certificate of appealability in habeas proceedings)