IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
January 14, 2009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
WILLIAM T. LEEKINS
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sylvia H. Rambo United States District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the court is a motion filed by Defendant pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The Government has filed a brief in opposition to the motion to which no reply has been filed by Defendant. Thus the motion is ripe for consideration by this court.
In the motion, Defendant claims he had ineffective assistance of counsel in the following respects: (1) counsel did not object to his wife not being placed under oath when she gave her accounts of the events giving rise to the charges against Defendant; (2) that he was sentenced twice for the same crime; (3) that counsel did not raise Defendant's purported mental condition; (4) that Defendant's wife stated she did not know about firearms even though she was licensed to hunt; (5) that Defendant believed he "took a plea for . . . ten years but was given twenty-two"; and (6) that counsel did not know about "rule 11 of the Constitution."
The procedural and factual background of this case is adequately set forth in the brief in the Government in opposition to the motion and will not be repeated here. In addition, the brief in opposition is thorough and accurate. This court therefore adopts the Government's recitation of the procedural and factual history as will as the arguments in opposition to the motion.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1) The motion filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED.
2) This court declines to issue a certificate of appealability.
3) The Clerk of Court shall close the file.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.