Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-06605/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-06605-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

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

NO. CR-04-20174-RMW

(Related to: C-06-06605-RMW)

ORDER SUMMARILY DENYING MOTION UNDER § 2255

*E-Filed on: 7/29/10*

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

GAMALIEL QUEVEDO,

 Defendant.

Case No. CR-04-20174-RMW

(Related to C-06-06605-RMW)

ORDER SUMMARILY DENYING MOTION

UNDER § 2255

On October 24, 2006 Gamaliel Quevedo filed a Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate,

Set Aside or Correct Sentence by Person in Federal Custody. He was sentenced on April 11, 2006

following his plea to distribution of 50 grams or more of methamphetamine pursuant to a plea

agreement. The plea agreement gave up the right to appeal but left open defendant's right to argue

for a minor role adjustment at sentencing. Defendant lost that argument at the sentencing hearing

and thus the court found that no Guideline point adjustment was appropriate. Defendant now argues

in his § 2255 petition that his counsel was ineffective for not explaining that his plea agreement gave

up his right to appeal the court's decision on the minor role adjustment.

The motion has no merit and is summarily denied. The plea agreement which defendant

signed is clear as to the waiver of appeal and that defendant only reserves the right to argue the

minor role adjustment. More importantly, there are no facts which suggest that defendant would

have received a more favorable sentence if he had not entered into his plea agreement or if his plea

Case 5:06-cv-06605-RMW Document 7 Filed 07/29/10 Page 1 of 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

NO. CR-04-20174-RMW

(Related to: C-06-06605-RMW)

ORDER SUMMARILY DENYING MOTION UNDER § 2255

agreement had allowed an appeal on the minor role adjustment. In light of the facts stipulated to in

the plea agreement, the court 's decision denying the minor role adjustment would undoubtedly have

been affirmed on appeal.

The motion is summarily denied and the clerk may close the file.

DATED: 7/29/10

_____________________________________

RONALD M. WHYTE

United States District Judge

Case 5:06-cv-06605-RMW Document 7 Filed 07/29/10 Page 2 of 2