McDonald v. United States of America

Filing 6

ORDER for Petitioner to provide the details of the exact nature of his Ground II(c) claims re 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) within 21 days of the date of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 03/08/2018. (jlh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION
TYRONE A. MCDONALD,
Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
_________

CV 117-167
(Formerly CR 114-068)

ORDER
_________
Petitioner, an inmate at the Federal Correctional Institute in Edgefield, South
Carolina, filed with this Court a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or
correct his sentence. After initial review of the motion, it appears no evidentiary hearing is
needed on any ground except potentially Ground II(c), in which Petitioner claims counsel
was ineffective for “fail[ing] to advise the Petitioner to accept a plea instead of electing for
trial.” (Doc. no. 1, p. 4.)
The Eleventh Circuit has held counsel can be ineffective in plea negotiations for
failing to provide the defendant with reasonably competent advice. Finch v. Vaughn, 67
F.3d 909, 916 (11th Cir. 1995). This includes knowing the law and applicable sentencing
range, and also includes the duty to consult with the client on important decisions and keep
the client informed of significant developments. Diaz v. United States, 930 F.2d 832, 834
(11th Cir. 1991). Negotiating a plea agreement stands as a “critical point for a defendant” in the
development of his case. Carmichael v. United States, 659 F. App’x 1013, 1021 (11th Cir.

2016). While there is no constitutional right to a plea agreement, and the decision to initiate plea
negotiations is ordinarily a strategic decision within the purview of defense counsel, “counsel is
still required to be a ‘reasonably effective advocate’ regarding the decision to seek a plea
bargain.” United States v. Lopez, 570 F. App’x 291, 292 (4th Cir. 2014). Here, because of the

lack of detail by Petitioner concerning the exact nature of his Ground II(c) claims, the Court
finds it necessary to require a sworn declaration from Petitioner concerning the exact nature
of those claims before deciding whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary.
The Court cautions Petitioner that litigants who lie to this Court may be
prosecuted. As explained by another Magistrate Judge in this District in this same context:
Lying under oath, either live or “on paper,” is illegal. See United States v.
Roberts, 308 F.3d 1147, 1155 (11th Cir. 2002) (defendant’s falsely subscribing
to statement in his habeas petition that he had not previously filed a § 2255
motion was “material” for purposes of perjury prosecution; statement fooled
the clerk of the court into accepting the “writ” for filing, and led the magistrate
judge to consider its merits until she discovered that the “writ” was a
successive § 2255 motion in disguise); United States v. Dickerson, CR608-36,
doc. 1 (S.D. Ga. Dec. 11, 2008) (§ 2255 movant indicted for perjury for
knowingly lying in his motion seeking collateral relief from his conviction);
id., doc. 47 (guilty verdict), cited in Irick v. United States, 2009 WL 2992562
at * 2 (S.D. Ga. Sept. 17, 2009 (unpublished); see also Colony Ins. Co. v. 9400
Abercorn, LLC, 866 F. Supp. 2d 1376, 1378 n. 2 (S.D. Ga. 2012).
Mingo v. United States, CV 614-099, doc. no. 2, p. 4 n.5 (S.D. Ga. Sept. 22, 2015) (Smith,
MJ).
Therefore, within twenty-one days of the date of this Order, Petitioner must – on the
attached form – provide the details of the exact nature of his Ground II(c) claims. He should
describe in detail all communications with counsel regarding counsel’s alleged ineffective
assistance, including without limitation, dates, participants, all relevant questions,
2

instructions, and advice having any relevance to the issue. If Petitioner fails to comply,
Petitioner’s claim will be denied for lack of factual foundation.
SO ORDERED this 8th day of March, 2018, at Augusta, Georgia.

3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION
TYRONE A. MCDONALD,
Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CV 117-167
(Formerly CR 11-068)

TYRONE A. MCDONALD’S STATEMENT
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________

4

___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is
true and correct and that this was placed in my prison’s mailing system on
________________________________________, 2018.

_________________________________
TYRONE A. MCDONALD

5