Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Cadena v. United States

United States District Court, N.D. Texas

September 5, 2017

MICHAEL CADENA, Movant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          JOHN McBRYDE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Came on for consideration the motion of Michael Cadena ("movant") under 2 8 U.S.C. § 22 55 to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence. After having considered such motion, its supporting amended memorandum, the government's response, and pertinent parts of the record in Case No. 4:14-CR-163-A, styled "United States of America v. Narcisco Rodriguez, et al., " the court has concluded that the motion should be denied.

         I.

         Background

         Information contained in the record of the underlying criminal case discloses the following:

On August 13, 2014, movant was named in a one-count indictment charging him and Narcisco Rodriguez with knowingly and intentionally combining, conspiring, confederating, and agreeing to engage in conduct in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B), namely to possess with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. CR Doc.[1] 1. Movant was arrested on November 16, 2014, and on November 17, 2014, the Federal Public Defender was appointed to represent him. CR Doc. unnumbered item following docket entry 6; CR Doc. 7, 10.

         On January 9, 2015, movant appeared before the court with the intent to enter a plea of guilty to the offense charged without benefit of a plea agreement. Under oath, movant stated that no one had made any promise or assurance of any kind to induce him to plead guilty. Further, movant stated his understanding that the guideline range was advisory and was one of many sentencing factors the court could consider; that the guideline range could not be calculated until the PSR was prepared; the court could impose a sentence more severe that the sentence recommended by the advisory guidelines and movant would be bound by his guilty plea; movant was satisfied with his counsel and had no complaints regarding his representation; and, movant and counsel had reviewed the factual resume and movant understood the meaning of everything in it and the stipulated facts were true. CR Doc. 70.

         On April 24, 2015, movant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 150 months to be followed by a four-year term of supervised release. CR Doc. 71 at 13-14. Movant appealed and his sentence was affirmed. CR Doc. 83, 84; United States v. Cadena, 642 Fed.Appx. 306 (5th Cir. 2016). On October 3, 2016, the United States Supreme Court denied movant's petition for writ of certiorari. CR Doc. 88; Cadena y. United States, 137 S.Ct. 128 (2016) .

         II.

         Grounds of the Motion

         Movant urges four grounds in support of his motion. The first three allege ineffective assistance of counsel. The fourth urges that movant's Fifth and Eighth Amendment rights were denied when he received a sentence that was substantially unreasonable and greater than necessary to achieve sentencing goals under 18 U.S.C. § 3553. Doc.[2] 1 at 4, ¶ 15.

         III.

         Standards of Review

         A. 28 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.