United States Second Circuit

The district court's denial of petitioner's motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his 188-month sentence based, in part, on the district court's imposition of the career offender enhancement under the United States Sentencing Guidelines for two drug convictions under Connecticut law which were later determined not to qualify as controlled substance offenses for enhancement purposes, is affirmed, where: 1) when entering his guilty plea petitioner knowingly waived his rights to collaterally attack his sentence; 2) the process by which the district court advised petitioner of his rights to appeal and to attack collaterally his conviction did not constitute plain error; and 3) the district court did not abuse its discretion when it denied petitioner's motion to amend his petition to plead an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/12/2014
• Published 03/12/2014

Judges

• HALL

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel