United States Sixth Circuit

Denial of petitioner's 28 U.S.C. section 2255 motion to vacate his sentence on a drug charge is affirmed where: 1) the district court correctly determined that petitioner's counsel provided constitutionally effective assistance with regard to both the amendment of his indictment and his plea agreement; 2) the amendment of petitioner's indictment did not deprive the district court of subject matter jurisdiction; and 3) petitioner waived his remaining arguments through his plea agreement.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/28/2006
• Published 12/28/2006

Judges

• Before SILER, GILMAN, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Alan G. Kimbrell, Grover, Missouri, for Appellant.  S. Delk Kennedy, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Alan G. Kimbrell, Grover, Missouri, for Appellant.   S. Delk Kennedy, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.