United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
FRANK A. LABOR, III, ESQUIRE Assistant United States Attorney On behalf of the United States of America.
DANIEL EARL EYSTER Defendant pro se.
JAMES KNOLL GARDNER, United States District Judge
This matter is before the court on defendant’s Habeas Corpus Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody.
For the reasons expressed in this Opinion, the motion is denied.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On October 8, 2008 an Indictment was filed charging defendant, Daniel Earl Eyster, with one count of Sexual exploitation of children in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251(a) and (e). On January 14, 2009, a Superseding Indictment was filed charging defendant with one count of Sexual exploitation of children in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2251(a) and (e); and one count of Possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B).
On February 19, 2009 defendant was interviewed by the Pennsylvania State Police concerning the sexual assault of a minor which was unrelated to the formal charges under the Superseding Indictment.
During a change-of-plea hearing on March 17, 2009, I conducted a guilty plea colloquy with defendant, who pled guilty to both counts of the Superseding Indictment.
On April 2, 2009 defendant was interviewed by United States Probation Officer Jason W. Fury, for a Presentence Investigation Report, at Lehigh County Prison in Allentown, Pennsylvania.
On July 8, 2009 defendant was sentenced to the maximum statutory sentence of 840 months. Several witnesses testified at the sentencing hearing.
Defendant appealed his sentence to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit which affirmed his sentence on July 14, 2010. On November 15, 2010 the United States Supreme Court denied defendant’s petition for a writ of certiorari.
On October 11, 2011, defendant pro se filed a motion for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence. On November 11, 2011, the United States’ Response to Defendant’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct His Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was filed. On January 30, 2012 defendant filed Movant’s Reply to Government’s Response.
Hence this Opinion.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Section 2255 of Title 28 of the United States Code provides federal prisoners with a vehicle for challenging an unlawfully imposed sentence. Section 2255 provides, in relevant part:
A prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress claiming the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the court was without jurisdiction to impose such a sentence, or that the sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law, or is otherwise subject to collateral attack, may move the court which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct the sentence.
28 U.S.C. § 2255(a).
A motion to vacate sentence under section 2255 “is addressed to the sound discretion of the district court”. United States v. Williams, 615 F.2d 585, 591 (3d Cir. 1980). A petitioner may prevail on a section 2255 habeas claim only by demonstrating that an error of law was either constitutional error, jurisdictional error, “a fundamental defect which inherently results in a complete miscarriage of justice, ” or an “omission inconsistent with the ...