United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
States Magistrate Judge David R. Grand
OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO
VACATE SENTENCE [#96]
GERSHWIN A. DRAIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
Anngela Boyle was sentenced to thirty years in federal prison
after pleading guilty to two counts of Aiding and Abetting
the Production of Child Pornography, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 2251(a) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. She now moves
to vacate her sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
before the Court is Defendant's Motion to Vacate
Sentence. Dkt. 96. An evidentiary hearing was held on March
29, 2019. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will
DENY Defendant's Motion [#96].
filed the instant Motion challenging her sentence on October
15, 2018. Dkt. No. 96. On November 7, 2018, the Court entered
an Order advising Defendant that if she chose to proceed with
the Motion, this would require waiving her attorney-client
privilege, so the Government could investigate her claims.
Dkt. No. 101. The Court gave Defendant thirty days to
withdraw her Motion, or else, the Court would construe that
as a waiver of the attorney-client privilege. See
Id. Defendant did not withdraw her Motion. Hence, on
December 12, 2018, the Court entered an Order finding
Defendant had waived her attorney-client privilege to the
extent necessary to litigate her claims. Dkt. No. 103.
U.S.C. § 2255 provides prisoners with a mechanism to
raise collateral attacks on their sentence. See 28
U.S.C. § 2255(a). Unless the prisoner's motion
conclusively shows that they are entitled to no relief, the
court shall notify and serve the United States attorney,
grant a prompt hearing, and determine the issues -- making
findings of fact and conclusions of law. See 28
U.S.C. § 225(b). If the court finds that a judgment was
rendered without jurisdiction, or that the sentence imposed
was not authorized by law or otherwise open to collateral
attack, or that there has been a denial or infringement of
the constitutional rights of the prisoner such as to render
the judgment vulnerable to collateral attack, the court shall
vacate and set the judgment aside and shall discharge the
prisoner or resentence him or grant a new trial or correct
the sentence as may appear appropriate. See id.
moves to set aside her sentence on grounds of ineffective
assistance of counsel. Specifically, she raises four claims:
(1) Defense counsel failed to file a notice of appeal when
one was requested; (2) Defense counsel failed to challenge
the disparity in her sentence; (3) Defense counsel failed to
challenge the calculation of her restitution; and (4) Defense
counsel failed to challenge her sentence enhancement. Dkt.
establish a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, a
defendant must show that (1) her attorney's
representation fell below an objective standard of
reasonableness, and (2) there is a reasonable probability
that this deficiency prejudiced the outcome. See Hill v.
Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 57-60 (1985); United States
v. Carter, 355 F.3d 920, 924 (6th Cir. 2004). The Sixth
Circuit has instructed reviewing courts to “indulge a
strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within
the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.”
Groseclose v. Bell, 130 F.3d 1161, 1167 (6th Cir.
1997) (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S.
668, 689 (1984)). Under this backdrop, the Court will analyze
each of Defendant's claims, in turn, below.
There is no Evidence Suggesting Defendant Sought to File an
Appeal of Her Sentence.
evidentiary hearing, Defendant's trial counsel, Natasha
Webster, testified that immediately following Defendant's
sentencing on September 27, 2017, she met with Defendant in
lockup and discussed her limited appeal
options.According to Ms. Webster, Defendant
expressed that ...