Rivera-Rivera v. United States, No. 15-1921 (1st Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseIn 2010, Petitioner pleaded guilty to several charges in connection with a drug-trafficking enterprise. The district court sentenced Petitioner to a ten-year term of immurement. Thereafter, Petitioner moved to correct the sentence. The district court denied the motion, ruling that the charges to which Petitioner had pleaded guilty barred him from receiving a shorter sentence. In 2012, Petitioner filed a pro se motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel. The magistrate judge set an evidentiary hearing limited to Petitioner’s claim that his then-attorney never told him about a nine-year plea offer. During the hearing, the magistrate judge heard conflicting testimony. The judge found the attorney’s version of events to be generally “consistent and credible” and, based on these findings, denied the section 2255 motion. The First Circuit affirmed, holding that the magistrate judge’s determination was not clearly erroneous.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.