Sylvester v. United States

Decision Date16 June 2015
Docket NumberCivil Case No. 10–15151.,Criminal Case No. 03–20008.
Citation110 F.Supp.3d 738
Parties James Roy SYLVESTER, Jr., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan

James Roy Sylvester, Jr., Glenville, WV, pro se.

Janet L. Parker, U.S. Attorney's Office, Bay City, MI, for Respondent.

George C. Bush, Saginaw, MI, for Corine Sylvester.

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION TO VACATE SENTENCE

DAVID M. LAWSON, District Judge.

Petitioner James Roy Sylvester, Jr. was convicted by a jury of drug trafficking and weapons offenses and sentenced on May 22, 2006 to a total prison term of 35 years.

His convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal. United States v. Sylvester, 330 Fed.Appx. 545 (6th Cir.2009). Sylvester then filed the present motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, alleging that (1) his rights under the Speedy Trial Act were violated and his trial and appellate counsel were ineffective in addressing that claim; (2) his trial and appellate counsel were ineffective by failing to file a motion to suppress the evidence seized from a suitcase he provided to coconspirators Vicki Loos and Jose Escobar for transporting illegal drugs; (3) his trial and appellate counsel were ineffective by failing to argue that his rights under the Fifth Amendment were violated where previously suppressed evidence was introduced at trial; and (4) his appellate counsel was ineffective by failing to argue that probable cause did not exist to search his home. The government has filed a response to the petition. For the reasons discussed below, the Court finds that the petitioner is not entitled to relief and therefore will deny his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

I.

The trial record establishes the following facts. Beginning in 2001, Sylvester arranged to transport large quantities of cocaine and other controlled substances from California to Michigan. Sylvester recruited Jose Escobar and Vicky Loos to take Greyhound buses to California with suitcases that Sylvester provided containing money to purchase cocaine. And, while in California, Escobar and Loos would meet with Calvin Ayers and Frederick Wyatt to exchange the money for drugs. They would then place the drugs in the suitcases and bring them to Sylvester in Saginaw, Michigan. They made at least four trips transporting large quantities of cocaine.

On February 24, 2003, an investigator for the Nebraska State Patrol noticed two suspicious suitcases in the checked baggage area at a bus station in Omaha, Nebraska. The luggage was padlocked and contained tags with three names: James Sylvester, Vicky Loos, and Jose Escobar. The investigator contacted Loos and Escobar and, following a search, found a total of five kilograms of cocaine in the suitcases.

Loos agreed to cooperate. She gave the investigator access to various documents in her purse, including a card with contact information for Calvin Ayers, a note from Sylvester that gave Loos and Escobar the false names they were to use during the trip, and receipts for a hotel room in Los Angeles, California.

Loos agreed to participate in a controlled delivery in Saginaw, Michigan. On February 25, 2003, Loos flew to Michigan, met Sylvester at the bus station in Saginaw, and delivered the luggage containing the drugs to him. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents arrested Sylvester, after he placed the luggage containing the drugs into his vehicle. Officers discovered 20 grams of crack cocaine in two packages in Sylvester's pants pockets during the booking process.

On February 25, 2003, officers submitted an application for a warrant to search 4041 Hess Street, Saginaw, Michigan, Sylvester's home. The affidavit in support of the search warrant stated in relevant part:

3. The FACTS establishing probable cause or the grounds for the search are:
A. That [Detective Kevin Conklin] is a police officer with the Michigan State Police, currently assigned to BAYANET (Bay Area Narcotics Enforcement Team) investigating drug crimes, and has been a police officer since May of 1995.
B. On February 24, 2003, luggage with the name of Ms. Vicky Loos attached to the luggage was found at the Omaha Nebraska bus terminal. Officers from the Nebraska State Police were given consent by Ms. Loos to search her luggage, as part of a drug interdiction.
C. Search of the baggage revealed approximately five kilograms of cocaine.
D. The ultimate destination of the cocaine is 4041 Hess Street, Saginaw, Michigan.
E. 4041 Hess Street, Saginaw, Michigan, is the listed residence of James Roy Sylvester, Jr., with a date of birth (DOB) of 3/51/59.
F. The baggage of Vicky Loos has now arrived in Saginaw Michigan, where Mr. James Roy Sylvester, Jr. was observed by Trooper Conklin, affiant, placing the bags containing the cocaine into his, Sylvester's car. Mr. Sylvester was arrested at the bus terminal and was found to have other amounts of cocaine on his person.

Page ID 124–126. A state court judge signed the search warrant on the same date.

DEA agents executed the search warrant on February 25, 2003. Agents found a loaded stolen 9 mm. semi-automatic handgun in Sylvester's bedroom, 187.4 grams of marijuana, drug paraphernalia, financial records, ammunition, and four long guns propped against the wall in the kitchen.

DEA agents returned to Sylvester's home on February 26, 2003. Corine Sylvester, the petitioner's mother, consented to a search of a Cadillac registered in her name. Agents found a bag containing $41,040 in cash in the trunk of her vehicle as well as records noting large amounts of money (over $50,000 in one withdrawal) deposited and then withdrawn from a safe deposit box. They also found 46 bottles of various prescription medications in the petitioner's home written to several people that did not live there. Additionally, agents located $11,600 in $100 bills located in a pocket in Sylvester's coat.

On February 26, 2003, a federal grand jury returned an indictment charging Sylvester with possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(ii)(II) ; and possession with intent to distribute five grams or more of crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(iii). The grand jury returned eight superseding indictments between February 2003 and January 2005, which added three additional co-defendants, Calvin Ayers, Corine Sylvester, and Frederick Wyatt, to the case. The final superseding indictment charged Sylvester with thirteen counts related to drug trafficking and firearm possession.

On February 5, 2004, Sylvester filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized from his home, arguing that the affidavit contained false statements and did not establish probable cause. The Court denied the motion on April 28, 2004, following a hearing, holding that the search warrant was supported by probable cause even without the challenged statements. On November 19, 2004, Sylvester filed a motion to dismiss the charges against him arguing that he had not been brought to trial within the time required by the Speedy Trial Act. The Court denied the motion on June 16, 2005.

All of the defendants except Sylvester entered into plea agreements. Trial began on September 13, 2005 and, on September 21, 2005, the jury found Sylvester guilty of possession with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, possession with intent to distribute five grams or more of cocaine base, possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense, felon in possession of a firearm, possession of marijuana, possession with intent to distribute oxycodone, diazepam, hydrocodone, and codeine, using interstate travel to acquire and transport five kilograms of cocaine, personally traveling in interstate commerce to acquire five kilograms of cocaine, and conspiracy to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine. His custody sentence totaled 35 years.

On appeal, Sylvester argued that the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress certain post-arrest statements, his rights under the Speedy Trial Act were violated, and his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was violated. The court of appeals rejected those arguments. No other appellate issues were raised. Sylvester filed the present motion under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his sentence, raising the four issues listed above. The government filed a response in opposition.

II.

A federal prisoner challenging his sentence under section 2255 must show that the sentence "was imposed in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States," the sentencing court lacked jurisdiction, the sentence exceeds the maximum penalty allowed by law, or the conviction "is otherwise subject to collateral attack." 28 U.S.C. § 2255(a). "A prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 must allege either: (1) an error of constitutional magnitude; (2) a sentence imposed outside the statutory limits; or (3) an error of fact or law that was so fundamental as to render the entire proceeding invalid.’ " Short v. United States, 471 F.3d 686, 691 (6th Cir.2006) (quoting Mallett v. United States, 334 F.3d 491, 496–97 (6th Cir.2003) ). Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are properly raised in a section 2255 motion. United States v. Graham, 484 F.3d 413, 421–22 (6th Cir.2007) (quoting United States v. Aguwa, 123 F.3d 418, 423 (6th Cir.1997) ).

In attacking his convictions, Sylvester raises four substantive issues: (1) he was not brought to trial within the time required by the Speedy Trial Act; (2) the evidence seized from the suitcase he provided to Loos and Escobar should have been suppressed; (3) his rights under the Fifth Amendment were violated where previously suppressed evidence was introduced at trial; and (4) probable cause did not exist to search his home. Of course, Sylvester is prevented from raising the legal issues that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • United States v. Sullivan, CR. NO. 17-00104 JMS-KJM
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Hawaii
    • December 19, 2019
    ...of a superseding indictment invalidate an existing court order excluding time under the STA. See, e.g., Sylvester v. United States,110 F. Supp. 3d 738, 749 (E.D. Mich. 2015) (finding that where the court excluded a period of time under the STA and a superseding indictment was filed prior to......
  • United States v. Prado
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Kentucky
    • October 29, 2018
    ...generally restarted the speedy trial clock if the superseding indictment adds new defendants to the case." Sylvester v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 3d 738, 747 (E.D. Mich. 2015) (collecting cases), aff'd 868 F.3d 503 (6th Cir. 2017); see also United States v. Chen Chiang Liu, 631 F.3d 993, ......
  • United States v. Jackson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Ohio
    • June 21, 2021
    ...Government acted in bad faith or unreasonably delayed filing those superseding indictments. See Henderson, 476 U.S. at 323 n.2; Sylvester, 110 F.Supp.3d at 747. The Court that the two superseding indictments each restarted the speedy trial clock in this case, with the second superseding ind......
  • United States v. Elsea
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Tennessee
    • February 23, 2022
    ... ... entered a plea of not guilty. [Minute Entry, Doc. 284, at 1] ... On this ... date, a separate speedy trial clock began to run on the new ... charges. See United States v. Rojas-Contreras ... Sylvester, 474 U.S. 231, 240 (Blackmun, J., concurring) ... (“In light of Congress' intent to bring defendants ... quickly to trial, it would make little sense to restart ... [the] 70-day period[] whenever there is a superseding ... indictment.”); Sylvester v. United States, ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT