Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02585/USCOURTS-azd-2_07-cv-02585-1/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, 

Plaintiff/Respondent, 

v.

Reynaldo Moreno-Andrade, 

Defendant/Movant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR-06-00736-04-PHX-DGC

No. CV-07-2585-PHX-DGC (BPV)

ORDER

Reynaldo Moreno-Andrade has filed a motion to vacate sentence pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2255. Dkt. #1. United States Magistrate Judge Bernardo P. Velasco has issued a

report and a recommendation that the motion be granted in part and denied in part (“R&R”).

Dkt. #2. The United States and Moreno-Andrade have both filed responses to the R&R, but

neither party has objected to the R&R. Dkt. ##4, 17. 

The Court has reviewed the portion of the R&R recommending that relief be granted,

and finds it well taken. Under United States v. Sandoval-Lopez, 409 F.3d 1193 (9th Cir.

2004), Moreno-Andrade’s counsel’s failure to file an appeal at Moreno-Andrade’s request

amounts to ineffective assistance of counsel, and this Court must grant the motion to vacate

and re-enter judgment against Moreno-Andrade in criminal case CR-06-00736-PHX-DGC

so that a timely appeal may be taken. See id. at 1198-99 (stating that “ineffective assistance

of counsel” is a term of art and does not mean incompetence of counsel). Because the

government does not object to the re-entry of judgment for this purpose, the Court concludes

that no hearing is necessary. 

Case 2:07-cv-02585-DGC-BPV Document 18 Filed 12/22/09 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

- 2 -

Judge Velasco also recommends that the Court deny relief on grounds three and four

of Moreno-Andrade’s motion. The parties have not objected to this recommendation, which

relieves the Court of its obligation to review. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d

1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985) (“[Section 636(b)(1)]

does not . . . require any review at all . . . of any issue that is not the subject of an

objection.”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3) (“The district judge must determine de novo any part

of the magistrate judge’s disposition that has been properly objected to.”). 

The Court will accept the R&R and grant Moreno-Andrade’s motion as to grounds

one and two, and deny it as to grounds three and four. The Court will also appoint counsel

for Moreno-Andrade to pursue a direct appeal in criminal case CR-06-00736-PHX-DGC.

In order to give Moreno-Andrade and his counsel time to review the case and the merits of

any appeal, the Court will not enter an order vacating and re-entering Moreno-Andrade’s

judgment in CR-06-00736-PHX-DGC until January 29, 2010. If Moreno-Andrade wishes

to appeal, he must file his notice of appeal within 14 days of the new judgment being entered

on January 29, 2010. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b).

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The R&R (Dkt. #2) is accepted.

2. The motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence (Dkt. #1) is granted in

part and denied in part. The Court will, on January 29, 2010, enter an order

vacating and re-entering Moreno-Andrade’s judgment in CR-06-00736-PHXDGC. 

3. The Court appoints attorney Tonya Peterson to represent Moreno-Andrade on

appeal from the re-entered judgment in CR-06-00736-PHX-DGC.

DATED this 21st day of December, 2009.

Case 2:07-cv-02585-DGC-BPV Document 18 Filed 12/22/09 Page 2 of 2