Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-02210/USCOURTS-azd-2_12-cv-02210-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff/Respondent, 

v. 

Ira W. Gentry, 

Defendant/Movant.

No. CV-12-02210-PHX-SRB

 CR06-00464-PHX-SRB 

ORDER 

 On October 16, 2012, Defendant Ira Gentry (Gentry) filed a Motion under 28 

U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody. 

The Government filed a response on May 6, 2013 and Gentry replied on June 7, 2013. In 

his motion, Gentry raised 15 issues which are detailed on pages 7-8 of the Magistrate 

Judge’s Report and Recommendation filed July 3, 2013. The Magistrate Judge concluded 

only Gentry’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was properly considered in this § 

2255 Motion because all other issues were raised or should have been raised in Gentry’s 

direct appeal and, therefore, are not reviewable in a § 2255 proceeding. 

 With respect to Gentry’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, the 

Magistrate Judge found the claims were premised primarily on Gentry’s contention that 

counsel should have pressed particular issues pretrial and in trial. All of these issues 

were also raised and decided adversely to Gentry in his direct appeal or in his other postconviction motions. His arguments on the merits on these issues were all rejected. 

Therefore, Gentry has not established his counsel’s performance was ineffective or that 

Case 2:12-cv-02210-SRB Document 19 Filed 12/20/13 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

he was prejudiced in anyway by any alleged failure of counsel to press non-meritorious 

issues. The Magistrate Judge recommended that Gentry’s motion be denied and 

dismissed with prejudice. 

 On July 17, 2013 Gentry filed timely objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report 

and Recommendation which the Court finds to be without merit. Rather the Court finds 

itself in agreement with the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. 

 IT IS ORDERED overruling Gentry’s objections to the Report and 

Recommendation. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge as the Order of this Court. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Gentry’s Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to 

Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody is denied. 

 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying any Certificate of Appealability and leave 

to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. The denial of the Petition is justified by a plain 

procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the procedural ruling debatable and 

because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional 

right. 

 Dated this 20th day of December, 2013. 

Case 2:12-cv-02210-SRB Document 19 Filed 12/20/13 Page 2 of 2