From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cox v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Aug 16, 2019
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-237 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 16, 2019)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-237 CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 4:13-CR-45(01)

08-16-2019

MICHAEL WARREN COX, JR., #20960-078 v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The above-styled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Kimberly C. Priest Johnson, who issued a Report and Recommendation concluding that Movant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (#1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 should be denied. Movant has filed objections.

Movant alleges that he is entitled to relief because his plea of guilty was not entered knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily due to ineffective assistance of counsel. At the time Movant pled guilty, he advised the Court that he was pleading knowingly, freely and voluntarily upon the advice of counsel. His "solemn declarations in open court carry a strong presumption of verity." United States v. Lampazianie, 251 F.3d 519, 524 (5th Cir. 2001) (quoting Blackedge v. Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 73-74 (1977)). He has not provided evidence to overcome the presumption. Furthermore, with respect to his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, he has not shown that his attorney's representation was deficient or that he was prejudiced by deficient representation, as required by Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688 (1984).

The Report of the Magistrate Judge, which contains proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of such action, has been presented for consideration. Having made a de novo review of the objections raised by Movant to the Report, the Court concludes that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the objections of Movant are without merit.

It is accordingly ORDERED that the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody (#1) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED, and the case is DISMISSED with prejudice. A certificate of appealability is DENIED. All motions by either party not previously ruled upon are DENIED.

Signed this date

Aug 16, 2019

/s/_________

MARCIA A. CRONE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Cox v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Aug 16, 2019
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-237 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 16, 2019)
Case details for

Cox v. United States

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL WARREN COX, JR., #20960-078 v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Date published: Aug 16, 2019

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-237 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 16, 2019)