Garrison v. United States

Background

A criminal complaint charged Kevin Garrison with possessing cocaine with intent to distribute and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime. Garrison pleaded guilty on November 9, 2022, under an October 11, 2022 plea agreement.

The agreement waived Garrison’s right to file a direct appeal or bring a collateral challenge, including a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, against any sentence within or below the stipulated Sentencing Guidelines range of 57 to 71 months. It also waived challenges to supervised release terms at or below the statutory maximum. The agreement expressly preserved any claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.

On April 12, 2023, the court sentenced Garrison to 47 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release. Garrison later filed a self-represented § 2255 petition, which is a request to vacate, set aside, or correct a federal sentence. He alleged that his lawyer, Mark I. Cohen, incorrectly advised him that he had no right to appeal and that he would have appealed if he had received different advice.

Parties’ Positions and Evidence

The United States argued that the record contradicted Garrison’s claim. It pointed to Garrison’s statements during the guilty-plea proceeding showing that he understood he was waiving the right to appeal his conviction and sentence.

Cohen submitted an affidavit stating that he reviewed the entire plea agreement, including the appeal waiver, with Garrison on October 21, 2022, met with him again on November 4, 2022, and confirmed that Garrison understood the waiver. Cohen also stated that, after sentencing, he reminded Garrison that the waiver applied because the sentence was below the agreed Guidelines range.

Court’s Analysis

The court applied the two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel. Under that test, a petitioner must show that counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that the deficient performance caused prejudice, meaning a reasonable probability that the proceeding would have turned out differently.

The court held that Garrison knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal or collaterally challenge a sentence within or below the 57-to-71-month range. During the plea proceeding, Garrison confirmed that he understood the waiver. The court also discussed the waiver with him at sentencing and explained that it applied to the 47-month sentence.

The court found that Cohen had discussed the waiver with Garrison and that Garrison’s allegations were contradicted by the plea and sentencing records and Cohen’s affidavit. The court further held that Garrison suffered no prejudice. Because his sentence was below the agreed Guidelines range and the waiver was valid and enforceable, the court concluded that he had not shown that he would have successfully appealed absent the alleged ineffective assistance.

Disposition

The court denied Garrison’s § 2255 petition. It did not recommend issuing a certificate of appealability because Garrison had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. The clerk was asked to close the civil case.