Filed: Aug. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 06, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2255 LARRY ALAN BURNS , District Judge . Defendant Andrea Ball pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin and was sentenced to 105 months' imprisonment, followed by eight years' supervised release. She was also a Defendant in case 17cr336, and in that case she pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin, conspiracy to import heroin, and conspiracy to launder monetary instruments. In that case, she was also sentenced to 105 months, followed
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2255 LARRY ALAN BURNS , District Judge . Defendant Andrea Ball pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin and was sentenced to 105 months' imprisonment, followed by eight years' supervised release. She was also a Defendant in case 17cr336, and in that case she pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin, conspiracy to import heroin, and conspiracy to launder monetary instruments. In that case, she was also sentenced to 105 months, followed ..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2255
LARRY ALAN BURNS, District Judge.
Defendant Andrea Ball pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin and was sentenced to 105 months' imprisonment, followed by eight years' supervised release. She was also a Defendant in case 17cr336, and in that case she pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin, conspiracy to import heroin, and conspiracy to launder monetary instruments. In that case, she was also sentenced to 105 months, followed by eight years' supervised release. The sentence and term of supervised release in this case run concurrently with those in case 17cr336.
In this case, Ball filed a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (Docket no. 195.) Her motion did not say what Ball wanted the Court to do, nor did it give adequate reasons for any change to her sentence. The Court issued an order (Docket no. 196) explaining why, in its current form, the motion would be denied. It gave her leave to file an amended petition no later than July 20. Or, if she felt she needed to file her petition under seal, she was given the option to do that. If Ball did not file an amended petition by July 20, the order cautioned, the Court would rule on her petition as filed.
Ball's counsel was directed to contact her and to assist her as needed. Since then, her counsel informally contacted chambers staff, saying that Ball did not want to proceed with the petition. But neither Ball nor her counsel have filed anything in the docket. The government, however, did file transcripts of Ball's change of plea hearing and her sentencing hearing. The transcripts show that Ball was fully lucid, understood and actively participated in the proceedings, and was satisfied with her counsel's performance. (See Docket no. 198 at 9:13-15; 11:12-15.) At sentencing, the only problem Ball mentioned was a dry throat, and after taking a drink of water, she allocated clearly and at length. (See Docket no. 197 at 8:21-10:13.)
For these reasons, and for reasons explained in the Court's earlier order (Docket no. 196), it is clear Ball is entitled to no relief. The motion is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
