U.S. v. SPEED, JFM-10-0700. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Maryland
Number: infdco20160926589
Visitors: 13
Filed: Aug. 04, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 04, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM J. FREDERICK MOTZ , District Judge . This case has been remanded to this court by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. I will assume that counsel was ineffective and did not file a notice of appeal on behalf of Michael Speed. Making this assumption will save the Government the cost of returning defendant to Baltimore and will save significant time and expense for the parties. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a new criminal judgment against Speed
Summary: MEMORANDUM J. FREDERICK MOTZ , District Judge . This case has been remanded to this court by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. I will assume that counsel was ineffective and did not file a notice of appeal on behalf of Michael Speed. Making this assumption will save the Government the cost of returning defendant to Baltimore and will save significant time and expense for the parties. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a new criminal judgment against Speed ..
More
MEMORANDUM
J. FREDERICK MOTZ, District Judge.
This case has been remanded to this court by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
I will assume that counsel was ineffective and did not file a notice of appeal on behalf of Michael Speed. Making this assumption will save the Government the cost of returning defendant to Baltimore and will save significant time and expense for the parties. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a new criminal judgment against Speed so as to commence his final appeal period anew. As to the substance of Speed's claim, I find that Speed's history of depression, anxiety, bi-polar disorder and regime of taking prescribed medicines did not result in an inability to process information or reason. Indeed, Speed's discovery of mistakes in the original plea agreement letter shows that he was fully competent. In any event, I do not find that Speed's alleged diminished capacity contributed to the commission of the offenses to which he pled guilty. See, e.g., United States v. Withers, 100 F.3d 1142, 1148 (4th Cir. 1996).
In order to assure that Speed's appeal is timely processed, I will order the issuance of a certificate of appealability.
Source: Leagle
