From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Garcia-Guizar

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 22, 2006
No. CR S-95-0411 GEB KJM P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2006)

Opinion

No. CR S-95-0411 GEB KJM P.

February 22, 2006


ORDER


Two matters are pending before this court. The first is a motion to vacate, correct, and set aside movant's sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Movant alleges, among other things, that trial counsel Charles Benninghoff was ineffective in failing to communicate to the court movant's desire to plead to the indictment without a plea agreement and in misadvising him about the likely consequences of standing trial. He also alleges that appellate counsel, Assistant Federal Defender Ann McClintock, failed to advise him of the possibility that a greater sentence would be imposed on remand from a successful appeal. The court has determined an evidentiary hearing is necessary to explore these representations and, if they are established, the prejudice flowing from them. Counsel therefore will be appointed to represent movant as to these two issues only. Movant may be required to reimburse the costs of counsel depending on the resolution of his second motion, for the return of property.

On September 9, 2005, the government filed its opposition to movant's motion for the return of property. Counsel is directed to file a further response, addressing the relationship between the BNE task force and the federal government. Counsel should support that response with evidence, including but not limited to the search warrant and its return, and other evidence bearing on the question of an agency relationship between the state and federal governments. See United States v. Huffhines, 986 F.2d 306, 308 (9th Cir. 1993); see also United States v. Albinson, 356 F.3d 278, 281 (3d Cir. 2004). In addition, counsel should discuss the relevance of docket no. 52. See also 4/30/96 RT at 26.

1. The Federal Defender's Officer is directed to find counsel to represent movant on the two claims identified above.

2. The Clerk's Office is directed to send a copy of the motion to vacate sentence filed April 10, 2002, the government's opposition filed August 27, 2002, and the reply filed November 13, 2002 to the Federal Defender's Office; the Federal Defender's Office is directed to provide these copies to counsel.

3. A status hearing is set for Wednesday, March 15, 2006, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 26 regarding the motion to vacate sentence.

4. The Clerk's Office is directed to serve a copy of this order on the Federal Defender's Office.

5. Within forty-five days of this order, counsel for the government is directed to respond to the court's inquiries in connection with the motion for return of property. Movant may file any opposition or additional information within thirty days of the date the government's response is filed.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Garcia-Guizar

United States District Court, E.D. California
Feb 22, 2006
No. CR S-95-0411 GEB KJM P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2006)
Case details for

U.S. v. Garcia-Guizar

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent, v. CONRAD GARCIA-GUIZAR, Movant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Feb 22, 2006

Citations

No. CR S-95-0411 GEB KJM P (E.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2006)