Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

USA v. Giles, 14-378(6) ADM/LIB. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Minnesota Number: infdco20180207a86 Visitors: 74
Filed: Feb. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 06, 2018
Summary: ORDER ANN D. MONTGOMERY , District Judge . On September 18, 2015, Defendant Aide Ochoa-Alapisco ("Ochoa-Alapisco") was sentenced to 48 months imprisonment for her role in a narcotics trafficking organization. See Sentencing J. [Docket No. 280]. On September 2, 2016, Ochoa-Alapisco filed a Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. 2255 [Docket No. 325], arguing that she was entitled to a minor participant reduction based on United States Sentencing Guideline 3B1.2. Her Motion was denied. See
More

ORDER

On September 18, 2015, Defendant Aide Ochoa-Alapisco ("Ochoa-Alapisco") was sentenced to 48 months imprisonment for her role in a narcotics trafficking organization. See Sentencing J. [Docket No. 280]. On September 2, 2016, Ochoa-Alapisco filed a Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Docket No. 325], arguing that she was entitled to a minor participant reduction based on United States Sentencing Guideline § 3B1.2. Her Motion was denied. See Mem. Op. Order [Docket No. 330]. On December 9, 2016, Ochoa-Alapisco filed a Motion for Reconsideration to Modify a Sentence [Docket No. 332], again arguing that she was entitled to the minor participant reduction. That Motion was also denied. See Order [Docket No. 333].

On January 29, 2018, Ochoa-Alapisco filed a Motion for Minor Role [Docket No. 334]. In this Motion, Ochoa-Alapisco again argues that she is entitled to a minor participant reduction. The current circumstances, however, remain unchanged from when Ochoa-Alapisco's previous requests were denied.1 Ochoa-Alapisco also states that her imprisonment has been extremely difficult for her family, and requests an order granting her release to ease her familial hardship. Although the Court is sympathetic to the familial strain often brought about by imprisonment, such hardship is not grounds for ordering Ochoa-Alapisco's release. Accordingly, Ochoa-Alapisco's Motion for Minor Role is denied.

Based upon the foregoing, and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Aide Ochoa-Alapisco's Motion for Minor Role [Docket No. 334] is DENIED.

FootNotes


1. To the extent that Ochoa-Alapisco argues that she received ineffective assistance of counsel, such an argument cannot be considered here because Ochoa-Alapisco has not received permission from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to file a successive § 2255 Motion. See Hill v. Morrison, 349 F.3d 1089, 1090 (8th Cir. 2003) ("Before a trial court may consider a second or successive § 2255 motion, however, a petitioner must obtain permission from the court of appeals.") citing 28 U.S.C. § 2244 and 2255.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer