United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
L. PATRICK AULD, Magistrate Judge.
This case comes before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for a recommended ruling on Petitioner's Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence (Docket Entry 46) ("Section 2255 Motion"), Motion for Leave to Amend by Supplementation (Docket Entry 50), and Motion for Unpresented Facts of Evidence [Petitioner] Did Not Present in First [Section] 2255 Motion (Docket Entry 51). For the reasons that follow, the Court should deny Petitioner's instant Motions.
This Court (per United States District Judge Catherine C. Eagles) previously entered a Judgment against Petitioner imposing, inter alia, a prison term of 192 months, upon his guilty plea to possessing a firearm as a felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). (Docket Entry 27; see also Docket Entry 1 (Indictment); Docket Entry 17 (Plea Agt.); Docket Entry 33 (Plea Hrg. Tr.).) Petitioner entered that plea conditionally, reserving his right to appeal the prior denial of his Motion to Suppress the charged firearm (on the grounds that its seizure occurred during an illegal search). (Docket Entry 17, ¶ 5.b.; Docket Entry 33 at 6, 12; see also Docket Entry 10 (Motion to Suppress); Text Order dated June 21, 2012 (denying Motion to Suppress); Docket Entry 32 (Motion to Suppress Hrg. Tr.).) After entry of the Court's Judgment, Petitioner gave Notice of Appeal (Docket Entry 28) and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit thereafter affirmed (in particular as to the suppression issue), United States v. Golden, 530 F.Appx. 261 (4th Cir. 2013).
Petitioner then timely filed his instant Section 2255 Motion. (Docket Entry 46.) Prior to any response thereto by the United States, Petitioner filed his instant Motion for Leave to Amend by Supplementation (Docket Entry 50) and his instant Motion for Unpresented Facts of Evidence [Petitioner] Did Not Present in First [Section] 2255 Motion (Docket Entry 51), as well as affidavits from two witnesses he called during the suppression hearing (Docket Entry 57). The United States subsequently responded (Docket Entry 62) and Petitioner timely replied (Docket Entry 64).
Petitioner's Section 2255 Motion asserts these 11 claims:
1) "Illegal Entry of the Residence" (Docket Entry 46, ¶ 12(Ground One));
2) "Federal Judge/US Federal Assistant Prosecutor Discredited Two Witnesses Previously Credited" (id., ¶ 12(Ground Two));
3) "US Federal Assistant Prosecutor Used One Week Continuance to Fabricate Incorrect Time Line" (id., ¶ 12(Ground Three));
4) "Fact Witness Made Victim" (id., ¶ 12(Ground Four));
5) "Coached/Manipulating/Leading Witnesses" (id., ¶ 12(Ground Five));
6) "US Federal Assistant Public Defender Should Not Have Been Assigned to [Petitioner's] Case" (id., ¶ 12(Ground Six));
7) "Mitigating Factors of Witness Statements Were Ignored by Federal Judge/US Federal Assistant ...