Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Artis v. United States

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division

May 21, 2018

PATRICK O'BRIAN ARTIS, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

          ORDER

          Max O. Cogburn United States District Judge

         THIS MATTER is before the Court on Petitioner's pro se Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, (Doc. No. 1), in which he seeks relief pursuant to Mathis v. United States, 136 S.Ct. 2243 (2016).

         I. BACKGROUND

         Petitioner pled guilty to two counts of bank robbery by force or violence pursuant to a plea agreement that is supported by a written factual proffer. (3:13-cr-218, Doc. Nos. 13, 14).

         The PSR scored the base offense level for each count as 20 and added two levels each for the robbery of a financial institution and threat of death. (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 19 at ¶¶ 25-27). Applying the multiple count adjustment resulted in a combined adjusted offense level of 26. (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 19 at ¶¶ 40-42). However, Petitioner qualifies as a career offender based on his prior felony convictions for crimes of violence, i.e., common law robbery (00CRS10024), robbery affecting interstate commerce (3:03CR186-01), burning an unoccupied building and malicious use of explosive damage to property (03CRS202418-19). (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 19 at ¶ 43), with an offense level of 34. (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 19 at ¶ 43). Three levels were deducted for acceptance of responsibility resulting in a total offense level of 31. (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 19 at ¶¶ 44-46). The criminal history section scored 11 criminal history points and two points were added because Petitioner committed the instant offense while under a criminal justice sentence, resulting in a criminal history score of 13 and a criminal history category of VI. (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 19 at ¶¶ 57-59). In addition, the criminal history category for career offenders is VI. (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 19 at ¶ 59). This resulted in a guideline imprisonment range of 188 to 235 months. (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 19 at ¶ 77).

         In a judgment docketed on August 8, 2014, the Court adjudicated Petitioner guilty and sentenced him to 188 months' imprisonment for each count, concurrent with each other and consecutive to his sentence in case number 3:03-cr-186, followed by three years of supervised release. (3:13-cv-218, Doc. No. 24). He did not appeal.

         Petitioner filed a § 2255 Motion to Vacate through counsel on June 16, 2016, attacking his career offender sentence under Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015), case number 3:16-cv-375. Petitioner voluntarily dismissed his petition on March 29, 2017, shortly after the Supreme Court issued its decision in Beckles v. United States, 137 S.Ct. 886 (2017).

         Petitioner filed the instant pro se § 2255 Motion to Vacate on March 26, 2018, (Doc. No. 1). He argues that he is actually innocent of his career offender designation pursuant to Mathis v. United States, 136 S.Ct. 2243 (2016), and that trial and appellate counsel were ineffective for failing to challenge his career offender designation.

         II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

         A federal prisoner claiming that his “sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or the laws of the United States, or that the court was without jurisdiction to impose such sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral attack, may move the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct the sentence.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(a). Rule 4(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings provides that courts are to promptly examine motions to vacate, along with “any attached exhibits and the record of prior proceedings . . .” in order to determine whether the petitioner is entitled to any relief on the claims set forth therein. After examining the record in this matter, the Court finds that the argument presented by the Petitioner can be resolved based on the record and governing case law. See Raines v. United States, 423 F.2d 526, 529 (4th Cir. 1970).

         III. DISCUSSION

         (1) Limitations

         A one-year statute of limitation applies to motions to vacate under § 2255, which runs from the latest of:

(1) the date on which the judgment of conviction becomes final;
(2) the date on which the impediment to making a motion created by governmental action in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States is removed, if the movant was prevented from ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.