Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Reid, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    4 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case from 1996. The court dismissed the appeal of Curtis Reid, who had filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held that Reid failed to establish his substantive claim that counsel was ineffective under the standards of Strickland v. Washington. Specifically, Reid did not show that he would have necessarily received credit for acceptance of responsibility under the sentencing guidelines even if he had pled guilty before trial. The court therefore denied Reid's certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1996-10-09 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-6556

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case from 1996. The court dismissed the appeal of Curtis Reid, who had filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held that Reid failed to establish his substantive claim that counsel was ineffective under the standards of Strickland v. Washington. Specifically, Reid did not show that he would have necessarily received credit for acceptance of responsibility under the sentencing guidelines even if he had pled guilty before trial. The court therefore denied Reid's certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    4 views2 pages

    United States v. Reid, 4th Cir. (1996)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case from 1996. The court dismissed the appeal of Curtis Reid, who had filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held that Reid failed to establish his substantive claim that counsel was ineffective under the standards of Strickland v. Washington. Specifically, Reid did not show that he would have necessarily received credit for acceptance of responsibility under the sentencing guidelines even if he had pled guilty before trial. The court therefore denied Reid's certificate of appealability and dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the district court's reasoning.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 96-6556

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CURTIS REID,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert D. Potter, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-92-57-3-P, CA-96-82-3-P)
    Submitted:

    September 24, 1996

    Decided:

    October 9, 1996

    Before HALL, WILKINS, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.


    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Cheryl Johns Sturm, West Chester, Pennsylvania, for Appellant.
    Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his
    motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and
    Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, 110 Stat.
    1214. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion
    and find no reversible error. We hold that Appellant failed to
    establish his substantive claim that counsel was ineffective. See
    Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984); Fields v. Maryland,
    956 F.2d 1290, 1297 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 885 (1992).
    Specifically, we hold that Appellant failed to show that he would
    necessarily have been entitled to credit for acceptance of responsibility under United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines
    Manual, 3E1.1 (Nov. 1991), even if he had pled guilty prior to
    trial. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and
    dismiss Appellant's appeal substantially on the reasoning of the
    district court. Reid v. United States, Nos. CR-92-57-3-P; CA-96-823-P (W.D.N.C. Mar. 14, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
    the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
    decisional process.

    DISMISSED

    You might also like