United States Sixth Circuit

Defendant's bank robbery conviction is affirmed where Defendant alleged that his counsel performed ineffectively by failing to preserve a future change-in-the-law agreement, but Defendant failed to show prejudice because the only way he could have obtained a favorable sentence was by petitioning for certiorari, which he did not do.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/29/2009
• Published 04/29/2009

Judges

• Before:  BOGGS, Chief Judge;  MARTIN, BATCHELDER, MOORE, COLE, CLAY, GILMAN, GIBBONS, ROGERS, SUTTON, COOK, McKEAGUE, GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Mary Hale Morris, Burch, Porter & Johnson, Memphis, Tennessee, for Appellant.  John-Alex Romano, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Mary Hale Morris, Mary C. Hamm, Burch, Porter & Johnson, Memphis, Tennessee, for Appellant.  John-Alex Romano, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., Hilliard H. Hester III, Assistant United States Attorney, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.