Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hall v. Hawley

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division

May 16, 2018

ARIZONA HALL, JR., Petitioner,
v.
JOSHUA D. HAWLEY, Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          CATHERINE D. PERRY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Petitioner is a parolee from the Missouri Department of Corrections. In 2013, petitioner was convicted in state court of four counts of unlawful possession of a firearm. (St. Louis City Circuit Court Criminal Case number 1022-CR-049750-01). Petitioner was originally sentenced as a prior and persistent offender, but on direct appeal the Missouri Court of Appeals reversed the sentence as improperly enhanced for the State's failure to allege prior and persistent status in the indictment. On remand, the state court sentenced petitioner to seven years' imprisonment on each count.

         In his amended petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, petitioner raises the following four grounds for relief:

1) the original indictment in his case was defective for failure to allege the essential element of enhancement of punishment and the court therefore did not acquire jurisdiction;
2) his conviction violates the Fifth Amendment's Grand Jury Clause because the State failed to allege his prior and persistent offender status in the indictment;
3) he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel because his attorney encouraged him to plead guilty to the unlawful possession of firearm charges in exchange for a ten-year sentence even though that sentence was based on an improper sentencing enhancement; and
4) his conviction violates his Second Amendment right to bear arms because the State restored his civil rights, allowing him to legally own firearms.

         Petitioner is not entitled to relief on any grounds raised in his § 2254 petition for the reasons set out below.

         Factual Background

         On direct appeal, the Missouri Court of Appeals summarized the evidence adduced at trial as follows:

On September 17, 2010, Officers Justin Ries and Marcus Alston drove to Defendant's house to execute a warrant for Defendant's arrest. Defendant answered the door, but he refused to step outside the door or allow the officers to enter. Defendant's guest allowed the officers entry to the house and, while they were searching for Defendant, the officers discovered two twelve-gauge shotguns, a 22-caliber rifle, and a 243-caliber rifle. The State of Missouri charged Movant with four counts of unlawful possession of a firearm. The indictment alleged that, in November 1987, Defendant “was convicted of the felony of Assault in the 1st degree and Armed Criminal Action” . . . . The trial court . . . found Defendant guilty of all four counts . . . .

[Doc. # 29-5].

         Standard of Review

         Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, federal habeas relief is available to a state prisoner “only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.