U.S. v. BROWN, WMN-07-0479 (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Maryland
Number: infdco20120328c83
Visitors: 20
Filed: Mar. 27, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 27, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM WILLIAM M. NICKERSON, Senior District Judge After a three day trial, a jury found Defendant Thurman Brown guilty of being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1). Based upon a finding that Defendant was an Armed Career Criminal, this Court imposed a sentence of 180 months of imprisonment, followed by a five-year term of supervised release. Defendant filed a timely appeal and his conviction and sentence were affirmed. United States v. Brow
Summary: MEMORANDUM WILLIAM M. NICKERSON, Senior District Judge After a three day trial, a jury found Defendant Thurman Brown guilty of being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1). Based upon a finding that Defendant was an Armed Career Criminal, this Court imposed a sentence of 180 months of imprisonment, followed by a five-year term of supervised release. Defendant filed a timely appeal and his conviction and sentence were affirmed. United States v. Brown..
More
MEMORANDUM
WILLIAM M. NICKERSON, Senior District Judge
After a three day trial, a jury found Defendant Thurman Brown guilty of being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Based upon a finding that Defendant was an Armed Career Criminal, this Court imposed a sentence of 180 months of imprisonment, followed by a five-year term of supervised release. Defendant filed a timely appeal and his conviction and sentence were affirmed. United States v. Brown, No. 09-4452 (4th Cir. Sept. 17, 2010). The issue on appeal was whether Defendant's 2003 state conviction for second degree assault qualified as a violent felony for purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act. The Fourth Circuit concluded that it did.
Defendant has now filed a Motion under § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody dated October 18, 2011. ECF No. 110. In completing the form provided by the Court for § 2255 motions, Defendant did not provide any grounds on which he believes he is entitled to relief. He does attach a letter to his form motion, but that letter provides no additional insight. Because Defendant provides no grounds, whatsoever, for the relief sought, the motion will be denied. A separate order will issue.
Source: Leagle
