Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-13-03646/USCOURTS-ca8-13-03646-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 13-3646

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Haldon Gilkes

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock

____________

 Submitted: January 20, 2015

Filed: February 19, 2015

[Unpublished]

____________

Before SMITH, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Haldon Gilkes isserving a five-year prison termafter pleading guilty to a drugconspiracy offense in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 846. He timely filed a 28

U.S.C. § 2255 motion, and the district court, without an evidentiary hearing, entered

an order summarily denying his motion. This court granted Gilkes a certificate of

Appellate Case: 13-3646 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/19/2015 Entry ID: 4245869 
appealability regarding his claim that his counsel was ineffective in failing to seek

safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f).

On appeal, Gilkes asserts, among other things, that he met all of the

requirements to be eligible for safety-valve relief, and consequently he should have

received a lower sentence. In response, the government concedes that Gilkes met

four of the five criteria for safety-valve relief, but contends that the record is unclear

as to whether he met the fifth criterion, which involves truthfully providing

information to the government concerning the offense or related offenses. 

Accordingly, the government suggests that a remand to develop the record would be

appropriate.

Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s order as to this claim only, and we

remand the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this

opinion.

______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 13-3646 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/19/2015 Entry ID: 4245869