JOHNSON
v.
UNITED STATES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court recommended denying the motion to vacate because the defendant withdrew his request to file an appeal after his attorney explained the risks.
The defendant, Michael Johnson, pleaded guilty and was sentenced. Two days later, he initially told his attorney he wanted to appeal, but later withdr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse 18 U.S.C. § 924(E) cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter arises from a § 2255 Motion filed by Michael Johnson following his guilty plea and conviction in the underlying case of United States v. Johnson, Case No. 21-CR-80191. The Motion raised five claims of constitutional deficiency. (DE 1). On May 31, 2024, the District Judge issued an Order denying Claims 1, 2, 4, and 5. (DE 13 at 16). As to Claim 3, the District Judge instructed the undersigned to conduct an evidentiary hearing and issue a Report and Recommendation regarding disposition of the claim, which alleged as follows:
[Trial] Counsel performed ineffectively by failing to file a notice of appeal after Movant requested that she file one.
(DE 1 at 7).
II. STANDARD
In Strickland v. Washington, the Supreme Court established a two-part test for determining ineffective assistance of counsel. 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). First, a petitioner must show that counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. Id. Second, a petitioner must show that this deficient performance prejudiced the defense. Id. To satisfy the second prong, a petitioner must show a reasonable probability exists that, but for counsel's deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have been different. Id. at 694. Both prongs of the test must be satisfied. Id. at 687. Courts “must indulge the strong presumption that counsel's performance was reasonable and that counsel made all significant decisions in the exercise of reasonable professional judgment.” Chandler v. United States, 218 F. 3d 1305, 1314 (11th Cir. 2000) (cleaned up).
When trial counsel fails to file a notice of appeal after being asked to do so, relief is mandatory under § 2255:
Under Strickland, an attorney acts in a professionally unreasonable manner when he fails to file an appeal on behalf of a client who specifically requests one. Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 477, 120 S. Ct. 1029, 145 L. Ed. 2d 985 (2000). Failure to file a requested notice of appeal is per se ineffective assistance of counsel, regardless of whether the appeal would have had merit. Id. at 483–86, 120 S. Ct. 1029. In that scenario, prejudice is presumed because the movant is denied the opportunity for a proceeding at all. Id. at 483, 120 S. Ct. 1029.
Hurtado v. United States, 808 F. App'x 798, 802 (11th Cir. 2020). In such circumstances, it makes no difference that the defendant has waived the right to appeal by way of a written plea agreement. Garza v. Idaho, 586 U.S. 232, 243 (2019).
III. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Based on the evidence received and considered during the evidentiary hearing on this matter, the Court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The Charges
1. In April 2022, a Superseding Information charged Johnson with the following offenses carrying the following potential penalties:
| Count | Offense
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984)
- Chandler v. United States, 218 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2000)
- Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 (U.S. 2000)
- United States v. Jackson, 55 F. 4th 846 (11th Cir. 2022)
- Brown v. United States, 602 U.S. 101 (U.S. 2024)