Mercer v. United States

Background

Earl Mercer filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which allows a person in federal custody to challenge a sentence in the court that imposed it. Mercer claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, meaning that his lawyer’s performance was constitutionally inadequate. He argued that his lawyer failed to tell the court adequately about Mercer’s substance-abuse problem and minor role in the offense, causing an unwarranted prison sentence. He also argued that his lawyer failed to appeal the sentence.

Mercer’s plea agreement waived his right to appeal or otherwise challenge a prison term of 37 months or less. The court sentenced him to 30 months.

Court’s analysis

The court held that the waiver applied. It found that the record clearly showed Mercer’s waiver was knowing and voluntary, and noted that Mercer did not argue otherwise. The court therefore enforced the plea agreement and denied Mercer’s challenge to his sentence without addressing whether the sentence was unwarranted based on the substance-abuse or minor-role arguments.

The court separately considered Mercer’s claim that his lawyer failed to file an appeal. It recognized that a defendant may bring such a claim even when a plea agreement includes an appeal waiver. But Mercer provided only an unsworn statement saying that he repeatedly told his lawyer to appeal. His lawyer submitted a sworn affidavit stating that he reviewed the appeal waiver with Mercer before the guilty plea and that Mercer never contacted him after sentencing or asked him to file an appeal. Based on that record, the court rejected Mercer’s claim.

Disposition

The court DENIED Mercer’s § 2255 motion. It also found that Mercer had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, so it did not grant a certificate of appealability. The Clerk was directed to mail Mercer a copy of the order, close the action, and mark all pending motions denied as moot. Judge Loretta A. Preska signed the order.