Moreno v. USA
Filing
1
ORDER denying Defendant's 2255 motion; denying motion for appointment of counsel. (ejdlc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/17/2019)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
SAN JOSE DIVISION
7
8
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Case No. 11-cr-00355 EJD
Plaintiff,
9
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
2255 MOTION; DENYING MOTION
FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
v.
10
11
JOSE ANGEL MORENO,
Docket Nos. 852, 854
United States District Court
Northern District of California
Defendant.
12
13
Pursuant to a plea agreement dated May 5, 2016, Defendant Jose Angel Moreno
14
(“Defendant”) pled guilty to Racketeering Conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) and to
15
Use of a Firearm in Relation to a Crime of Violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
16
Dkt. No. 540. Defendant was sentenced to a custodial term of 160 months and 5 years of
17
supervised release. Dkt. 606. Judgment was entered on August 8, 2018. Id.
18
19
20
Presently before the court are Defendants’ (1) motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his
sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and (2) motion for appointment of counsel.
Pursuant to paragraph 5 of the plea agreement, Defendant agreed not and waived his right
21
to file any collateral attack on his conviction or sentence including a petition under 28 U.S.C. §
22
2255. Defendant’s motions are therefore DENIED.
23
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 17, 2019
______________________________________
EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge
Case No.: 11-cr-355 EJD
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S 2255 MOTION; DENYING MOTION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
1
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?