Delgado v. United States

Background

Victor Delgado, representing himself, filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a law that allows a federal prisoner to ask the sentencing court to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence imposed in violation of federal law or the Constitution. The motion challenged Delgado’s 46-month sentence for stalking under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2261(b)(6), 2261A(2), and 2266(5). The related criminal case was No. 19-CR-732 (KMW).

Delgado pleaded guilty under a plea agreement. During the plea hearing, he confirmed that he understood the agreement, had discussed it with counsel, and was entering the plea voluntarily. The agreement waived his right to appeal or otherwise challenge a sentence within or below the stipulated Sentencing Guidelines range of 37 to 46 months. The court later imposed a 46-month sentence. Although the court advised Delgado of his right to appeal and the 14-day deadline for filing a notice of appeal, no notice was filed.

Claims and analysis

Delgado raised two ineffective-assistance claims. First, he alleged that counsel promised he would receive only one year of imprisonment and would be released through a compassionate-release process. The court treated this as a claim that his guilty plea was not knowing and intelligent. It relied on Delgado’s sworn statements during the plea hearing that he understood the plea agreement and its consequences. The court also found that Delgado had not shown that, even if counsel had made the alleged statement, he would have rejected the guilty plea and gone to trial. The court therefore found no basis to disturb its prior conclusion that the plea was knowing and intelligent.

Second, Delgado alleged that he told counsel after sentencing that he wanted to appeal, but counsel did not file a notice of appeal. The court first held that Delgado had knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to challenge the 46-month sentence. During the plea hearing, Delgado confirmed that no improper promises or threats induced his plea and that he understood he was giving up the right to appeal or otherwise challenge a sentence of 46 months or less. The court also noted that Delgado had not claimed that his sentence was based on a constitutionally impermissible factor.

The court nevertheless considered the appeal-filing claim separately. It explained that an attorney’s failure to file an appeal after receiving a specific instruction to do so can constitute ineffective assistance, even when the defendant waived appellate rights. But the court found that the written submissions were sufficient and that no evidentiary hearing was required. Delgado’s assertion appeared only in his unsworn filings, he supplied no supporting evidence, and the record contained no earlier complaint about counsel’s failure to appeal. Counsel submitted a sworn statement saying that Delgado had agreed that he should not file an appeal, had instead asked about compassionate release, and had never communicated a desire to appeal. The court found counsel’s statement credible and concluded that Delgado had not requested an appeal.

Disposition

The court denied Delgado’s § 2255 motion. It declined to issue a certificate of appealability because Delgado had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, so Delgado could not proceed without paying the filing fee for such an appeal. The Clerk was directed to close the motion in both the criminal and civil case dockets.