U.S. v. Hopkins, JFM-14-0422. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Maryland
Number: infdco20160415813
Visitors: 12
Filed: Mar. 21, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 21, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM J. FREDERICK MOTZ , District Judge . Hosie Hopkins, who pled guilty before the Honorable William Quarles (now retired), has filed this action under 28 U.S.C. 2255. The motion will be denied for the following reasons. First, Hopkins has produced absolutely no evidence that, as he alleges, the government presented false testimony before the grand jury. Second, the fact that Hopkins was charged with only a misdemeanor in state court before he was charged with a felony in federa
Summary: MEMORANDUM J. FREDERICK MOTZ , District Judge . Hosie Hopkins, who pled guilty before the Honorable William Quarles (now retired), has filed this action under 28 U.S.C. 2255. The motion will be denied for the following reasons. First, Hopkins has produced absolutely no evidence that, as he alleges, the government presented false testimony before the grand jury. Second, the fact that Hopkins was charged with only a misdemeanor in state court before he was charged with a felony in federal..
More
MEMORANDUM
J. FREDERICK MOTZ, District Judge.
Hosie Hopkins, who pled guilty before the Honorable William Quarles (now retired), has filed this action under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The motion will be denied for the following reasons.
First, Hopkins has produced absolutely no evidence that, as he alleges, the government presented false testimony before the grand jury.
Second, the fact that Hopkins was charged with only a misdemeanor in state court before he was charged with a felony in federal court is immaterial. The facts to which he admitted during the course of his guilty plea colloquy established that he had committed a felon in violation of federal law.
Third, Hopkins' claim that his counsel was ineffective because he did not challenge his guilt based upon drug weight or challenge his prior conviction fails. First, the drug weight was immaterial to Hopkins' conviction. Second, again he has produced no evidence to show that his prior convictions were not valid.
A separate order denying Hopkins' motion is being entered herewith.
Source: Leagle
