United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CATHERINE D. PERRY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Farmer seeks to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Farmer was convicted by a jury
of five counts: one for distribution of twenty-eight grams or
more of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), a
second for possession within intent to distribute cocaine in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and three counts of
possession of marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §
844(a). See No. 4:12CR375CDP. Farmer was sentenced
to 120 months imprisonment for Counts I and II, and a term of
24 months on each of Counts III, IV, and V, with all counts
to run concurrently. Farmer appealed, and the Eighth Circuit
Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence.
United States v. Reginald Farmer, No. 13-3041 (8th
Cir. July 11, 2014)(unpublished).
then filed this § 2255 motion, raising the following
grounds for relief:
1) The government violated Brady v. Maryland by
failing to turn over video evidence of the parking lot that
would depict the hand-to-transaction leading to his arrest;
2) He was unconstitutionally subjected to an enhanced
sentence under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1) and § 851
because of his prior drug convictions;
3) Ineffective assistance of counsel for the following
a. His trial counsel failed to obtain the video evidence
b. His trial counsel failed to move to strike the expert
testimony of the drug chemist.
records before me conclusively demonstrate that Farmer has no
right to relief and I will deny Farmer's motion without
an evidentiary hearing for the reasons that follow.
No. Evidentiary Hearing is Required
not hold an evidentiary hearing on this matter. “A
petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a section
2255 motion unless the motion and the files and records of
the case conclusively show that he is entitled to no
relief.” Anjulo-Lopez v. United States, 541
F.3d 814, 817 (8th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks
omitted). “No hearing is required, however, where the
claim is inadequate on its face or if the record
affirmatively refutes the factual assertions upon which it is
based.” Id. (internal quotation marks and
citations omitted). The record here conclusively refutes the
claims, so I will not hold an evidentiary hearing.
Claims 1 and 2 are Procedurally Barred
collateral challenge may not do service for an appeal.”
United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152, 165 (1982).
“[N]ormally a collateral attack should not be
entertained if defendant failed, for no good reason, to use
another available avenue of relief.” Poor Thunder
v. United States, 810 F.2d 817, 823 (8th Cir. 1987)
(internal citation omitted). Farmer did not raise Grounds 1
and 2 on direct appeal. If a claim could have been raised on
direct appeal but was not, it cannot be raised in a §
2255 motion unless the movant can show both (1) a
“cause” that excuses the default, and (2)
“actual prejudice” ...