United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
JERRY B. CHAMBERS, Movant,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
B. Chambers, Petitioner, Pro se.
States of America, Respondent, represented by Thomas J.
Mehan, OFFICE OF U.S. ATTORNEY.
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
EDWARD AUTREY, District Judge.
matter is before the Court on Jerry Chambers' Motion to
Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Â§
2255, [Doc. No. 1]. The United States of America has
responded to the motion, pursuant to the Court's Show
Cause Order. For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is
14, 2012, Movant entered a plea of guilty, pursuant to a
written plea agreement, to a four count information charging
him with two counts of armed bank robbery (Counts One and
Three), the use of a firearm during that bank robbery (Count
Two), and armed robbery of a business engaged in commerce,
(Count Four). On August 15, 2012, Movant was sentenced to 240
months imprisonment: 156 months on each of Counts 1, 3, and
4, all such terms to be served concurrently to each other and
to a term of 84 months on Count 2, to be served consecutively
to the sentences on Counts 1, 3, and 4. This sentence was
consistent with the agreement in the Plea Agreement.
Contained within the Plea Agreement, in exchange for
Petitioner's voluntary plea of guilty, the government
agreed that no further federal prosecution would be brought
in either this District or the Southern District of Illinois,
where one of the bank robberies occurred.
filed this Motion for Post-Conviction Relief pursuant to
Title 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 on June 11, 2012.
FOR RELIEF UNDER 28 U.S.C. Â§2255 A federal prisoner seeking
relief from a sentence under 28 U.S.C. Â§ 2255 on the ground
"that the sentence was imposed in violation of the
Constitution or laws of the United States, or that the court
was without jurisdiction to impose such sentence, or that the
sentence was in excess of the maximum authorized by law, or
is otherwise subject to collateral attack, may move the court
which imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside or correct
the sentence." 28 U.S.C. Â§ 2255. In order to obtain
relief under Â§ 2255, the movant must allege a violation
constituting "a fundamental defect which inherently
results in a complete miscarriage of justice.'"
United States v. Gomez, 326 F.3d 971, 974 (8th Cir.
2003) (quoting United States v. Boone, 869 F.2d
1089, 1091 n.4 (8th Cir. 1989)).
brought under Â§ 2255 may also be limited by procedural
default. A movant "cannot raise a nonconstitutional or
nonjurisdictional issue in a Â§ 2255 motion if the issue could
have been raised on direct appeal but was not."
Anderson v. United States, 25 F.3d 704, 706 (8th
Cir. 1994) (citing Belford v. United States, 975
F.2d 310, 313 (7th Cir. 1992)). Furthermore, even
constitutional or jurisdictional claims not raised on direct
appeal cannot be raised collaterally in a Â§ 2255 motion
"unless a petitioner can demonstrate (1) cause for the
default and actual prejudice or (2) actual innocence."
United States v. Moss, 252 F.3d 993, 1001 (8th Cir.
2001) (citing Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S.
614, 622 (1998)).
to Evidentiary Hearing
Court must hold an evidentiary hearing to consider claims in
a Â§ 2255 motion "[u]nless the motion and the files and
records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is
entitled to no relief.'" Shaw v. United
States,24 F.3d 1040, 1043 (8th Cir. 1994) (alteration
in original) (quoting 28 U.S.C. Â§ 2255). Thus, a movant is
entitled to an evidentiary hearing "when the facts
alleged, if true, would entitle [the movant] to
relief.'" Payne v. United States, 78 F.3d
343, 347 (8th Cir. 1996) (quoting Wade v.
Armontrout,798 F.2d 304, 306 (8th Cir. 986)). The Court
may dismiss a claim "without an evidentiary hearing if
the claim is inadequate on its face or if the record
affirmatively refutes the factual assertions upon which it is
based." Shaw, 24 F.3d at 1043 (citing
Larson v. United States,905 F.2d 218, 220-21 (8th