Opinion
5:17-cr-00029-LAG-CHW
08-19-2021
RAYMOND F. WILLIAMS, et al., Movants, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
Proceedings Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Before the U.S. Magistrate Judge
ORDER
CHARLES H. WEIGLE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Before the Court are three identical Section 2255 motions filed on behalf of Raymond F. Williams and two corporate defendants, U.S. Technology Corporation and U.S. Technology Aerospace Engineering Corporation. (Docs. 179-81). Largely, the motions raise claims of ineffective assistance of counsel relating to fines.
Generally, “[a] convicted defendant who receives an allegedly erroneous fine because of constitutionally inadequate assistance of counsel cannot seek post-conviction relief under §2255.” Mamone v. United States, 559 F.3d 1209, 1211 (11th Cir. 2009) (quoting United States v. Segler, 37 F.3d 1131, 1137 (5th Cir. 1994)). Rather, “the language and purpose of § 2255 [shows it has] a uniform focus on custodial sentences.” Id.
Nevertheless, the Court cannot say at present that the instant motions are, in their entirety, “plainly … not entitled to relief.” Rule 4 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings. It is therefore ORDERED that within thirty days of the date of this order, the Movants shall amend their motions to include every unalleged constitutional error or deprivation entitling them to Section 2255 relief, failing which the Movants will be presumed to have deliberately waived complaints relating to errors or deprivations not raised.
It is further ORDERED that the United States Attorney respond to the Movants' claims by answering or otherwise defending pursuant to Rule 5 of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings within sixty days of the date of this order
SO ORDERED.