Kennedy v. United States
Decision Date | 01 February 2018 |
Docket Number | Case No.: 2:14-cr-12,CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:15-cv-30 |
Parties | WESTLEY KAYEON KENNEDY, Movant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia |
Movant Westley Kayeon Kennedy, ("Kennedy"), who is currently incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution, Williamsburg in Salters, South Carolina filed a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct his Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (Doc. 1.) Respondent filed a Response, (doc. 12), to which Kennedy filed Motions to Amend, (doc. 16, 17), and an Amended Section 2255 Motion, (doc. 17-1). Respondent filed a Response to Kennedy's Amended Section 2255 Motion, (doc. 18), and Kennedy filed a Reply, (doc. 19). For the purposes of the Court's Order, the Court GRANTS Kennedy's Motions to Amend, (docs. 16, 17), and considers his Amended Motion, (doc. 17-1), as the operative pleading.
However, for the reasons which follow, the Court DENIES Kennedy's Motion to Appoint Counsel. (Doc. 20.) Further, I RECOMMEND that the Court DENY Kennedy's Amended Section 2255 Motion, DIRECT the Clerk of Court to CLOSE this case and enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal, and DENY Kennedy a Certificate of Appealability and in forma pauperis status on appeal.
In this Section 2255 Motion, Kennedy challenges a conviction and sentence he received in this Court, after entry of a guilty plea to the lesser included offense of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, and to distribute, a quantity of controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. J., United States v. Kennedy, et al., 2:14-cr-12 (S.D. Ga. Feb. 23, 2015), ECF No. 627. Kennedy had a recommended total offense level of 37 and criminal history category IV. (Pre-Sentence Investigation Report ("PSI"), ¶ 70.) Based on this offense level and category, Kennedy's advisory sentencing guideline range was 360 months to life. (Id.) However, the statutory maximum term of imprisonment for the crime to which he pleaded guilty is twenty (20) years, or 240 months. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(b)(1)(C); U.S.S.G. § 5G1.1(a); (PSI ¶ 70). The Honorable Lisa Godbey Wood sentenced Kennedy to the maximum allowed 240 months' imprisonment. J., United States v. Kennedy, et al., 2:14-cr-12 (S.D. Ga. Feb. 23, 2015), ECF No. 627. The Court appointed B. Reid Zeh, III to represent Kennedy during these proceedings. CJA 20, United States v. Kennedy, et al., 2:14-cr-12 (S.D. Ga. Apr. 11, 2014), ECF No. 43.
In June 2014, the grand jury for the Southern District of Georgia returned a superseding indictment against Kennedy and twelve others for twenty-two (22) violations of federal law. Superseding Indictment, United States v. Kennedy, et al., 2:14-cr-12 (S.D. Ga. June 4, 2014), ECF No. 208. Specifically, Kennedy was charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, and to distribute, fifty (50) grams or more of a mixture of methamphetamine, and quantities of cocaine and oxycodone, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), (b)(1)(C), and § 846 (Count 1); two counts of distribution of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (Counts 3, 4); and eight counts of use of a communication facility (cell phones), in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b) (Counts 7-8, 10-12, 16-18). (Id.) If convicted of each Count, Kennedy faced a potential maximum sentence of 120 years' imprisonment, fines totaling $9,000,000.00, or both. Penalty Certification, United States v. Kennedy, et al., 2:14-cr-12 (S.D. Ga. June 4, 2014), ECF No. 209.
However, Kennedy and his attorney, Mr. Zeh, were able to negotiate a plea agreement with the Government whereby Kennedy agreed to plead guilty to the lesser included offense of Count One, violation of Section 846, in exchange for the Government dropping the remaining charges. Plea Agreement, United States v. Kennedy, et al., 2:14-cr-12 (S.D. Ga. July 15, 2014), ECF No. 425, pp. 2-3. As indicated above, the statutory maximum term of imprisonment for the violation to which Kennedy pleaded is twenty (20) years. Under the terms of the plea agreement, Kennedy promised to, among other things, acknowledge the factual basis of his plea, cooperate with the government for a downward departure, waive his right to direct appeal (with limited exception), and waive his right to collaterally attack his sentence. Id. at p. 3. In return, the Government promised to refrain from objecting to an acceptance of responsibility reduction, not file a 21 U.S.C. § 851 enhancement, and to consider whether Kennedy's cooperation sufficed for a downward departure. Id. at p. 2.
Kennedy appeared before Judge Wood for his change of plea, or Rule 11, proceeding. Judge Wood addressed Kennedy and informed him the purpose of the hearing was to ensure that he understood the case that was pending against him, that he understood all of the rights he was waiving or giving up by pleading guilty, and that there was a factual basis for the guilty plea. Change of Plea Hr'g Tr., United States v. Kennedy, et al., 2:14-cr-12 (S.D. Ga. June 10, 2015), ECF No. 666, pp. 2-3. Judge Wood inquired whether anyone had forced Kennedy to offer to plead guilty, and he said no one had done so and that pleading guilty was what he wanted to do. Id. at p. 3. Judge Wood told Kennedy that he did not have to plead guilty, and if he chose topersist in his not guilty plea, he would have the right to: a public and speedy trial by jury; a presumption of innocence during that trial; the assistance of trial counsel; see, hear, confront, and cross-examine the Government's witnesses and evidence; call witnesses on his behalf; and testify himself or remain silent. Id. at pp. 6-8. However, Judge Wood cautioned Kennedy he would be waiving these rights if he pleaded guilty and if she accepted that guilty plea. Id. at p. 8.
Kennedy stated he understood. Id. at pp. 6-8. Kennedy also stated he and Mr. Zeh reviewed the Superseding Indictment together, that he had the opportunity to talk to Mr. Zeh about the facts of his case, as well as about the proposed plea agreement, and that Mr. Zeh had discussed the law and procedure pertaining to his case. Id. at pp. 9-10. Kennedy stated that he was satisfied with Mr. Zeh's services and that he had no complaints whatsoever. Id. at p. 12.
Judge Wood reviewed the counts of the Superseding Indictment applicable to Kennedy with him and the essential elements of the crimes for which he was charged and that the Government would have to prove if he went to trial. Id. at pp. 10-14. Judge Wood advised Kennedy of the maximum sentence she could impose, twenty (20) years, for the crime to which he was pleading. Id. at pp. 13-14. Moreover, Judge Wood explained to Kennedy that, in imposing a sentence upon him, she would have to take into consideration the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553. Id. at pp. 14-15. Kennedy stated that no one had promised him an exact sentence, and Judge Wood explained that anyone's estimation of what his sentence might be would in no way bind the Court. Id. at p. 15. Judge Wood then asked the Assistant United States Attorney ("AUSA") to summarize the provisions of the plea agreement. AUSA Carlton Bourne stated:
Id. at pp. 16-17. Judge Wood asked Kennedy if AUSA Bourne's summarization of the plea agreement was consistent with the plea agreement he signed, and he stated it was. Id. at p. 17. Kennedy also stated he read the plea agreement, and Mr. Zeh answered any questions he may have had before he signed the agreement. Id. Kennedy reaffirmed that no one had made him any promises regarding the outcome of his case, other than the provisions contained in the plea agreement. Id.
Judge Wood then specifically addressed the direct appeal waiver with Kennedy:
I want to follow up on something that Mr. Bourne referenced. And that is, as a part of this plea agreement that you are urging, it does contain a waiver of appellate rights. It states: Defendant entirely waives his right to direct appeal of his conviction. The Defendant agrees to waive his right to appeal the sentence. Now there are three exceptions to that appeal waiver. That is, if one of these three things were to occur, you would be able to appeal directly, but only if one of these three things were to occur. Number one, if I were to sentence you above the statutory maximum, then you could appeal that directly; or number two, if I were to sentence you above the advisory guideline range as found by me, then you could appeal that directly; or number three, if the Government were to file a direct appeal, then you too could file a direct appeal. But otherwise, aside from those three situations, by...
To continue reading
Request your trial