Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Javed

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

April 23, 2019

United States of America, Plaintiff/Respondent,
v.
Manawar Javed, Defendant/Petitioner.

          OPINION & ORDER DENYING JAVED'S MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255

          SEAN F. COX UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This is a habeas petition made pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Acting through Court-appointed counsel, Petitioner Manawar Javed filed his habeas petition, asserting that he is entitled to relief from his conviction of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and wire fraud. Javed claims that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to explain the immigration consequences of his guilty plea and all of the terms of his Rule 11 agreement. Because the files and records of the case conclusively show that Javed is not entitled to habeas relief, an evidentiary hearing is not necessary and the matter is ripe for the Court's decision. For the reasons below, the Court will deny the motion and decline to issue a certificate of appealability.

         BACKGROUND

         On June 11, 2015, a grand jury indicted Javed on one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and wire fraud (“Count I”), and one count of conspiracy to pay and receive kickbacks (“Count II”). Javed was released on bond. During his criminal proceedings, Javed was represented by attorney Edward Wishnow.

         On March 17, 2016 (the day of the final pre-trial conference), Javed agreed to a Rule 11 plea agreement, wherein he would plead guilty to Count I and the Government would dismiss Count II. The Court scheduled a plea hearing for March 18, 2016. On the morning of the plea hearing, the Government moved to detain Javed pending sentencing because of comments he had made to his Pre-Trial Services Supervisor.

         During the plea hearing, Javed confirmed that he had reviewed the Rule 11 agreement with his counsel and that he was satisfied with his counsel's performance:

The Court: It is my understanding that you have executed a Rule 11 Plea Agreement, which has been marked as Exhibit One. Is that correct?
Javed: Yes, sir.
The Court: Do you have that document in front of you?
Javed: Yes.
The Court: Is your signature on that document?
Javed: Yes, sir.
The Court: At what page?
Javed: Page 16, sir.
The Court: Before you signed that document, did you read the document as well as the attached worksheets, which are worksheets A, B which consists of two pages, worksheet C, which consists of two pages, as well as worksheet E which consists of four pages?
Javed: Yes, sir.
The Court: Before you signed Exhibit One, did your lawyer answer each and every question that you had regarding anything contained in the Rule 11 agreement as well as the attached worksheets?
Javed: Yes, sir. The Court: Do you have any questions at all regarding anything contained in the Rule 11 agreement as well as the attached worksheets?
Javed: No, sir. The Court: Has Mr. Wishnow answered each and every question that you've had regarding your case?
Javed: Yes, sir. The Court: Are you satisfied with the advice and service provided to you by your attorney in your case?
Javed: Yes, sir.

(ECF No. 156, PageID 1092-1094).

The plea hearing also touched upon the issue of Javed's immigration status:
The Court: Sir, it's my understanding that you are not a citizen of the United ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.