Morelos v. United States, No. 12-1182 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CasePetitioner filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255, asserting claims of prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of both trial and appellate counsel. The court held that petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel both failed under Strickland v. Washington. The court found no merit in petitioner's unsupported allegations regarding the manner in which his co-conspirators testified and speculation that the prosecutor coached the testimony. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Prisoner case - habeas. Claim that trial counsel was ineffective regarding impeachment and cross-examination rejected; claim of ineffective assistance during closing argument is based on an inaccurate statement of the government's burden at trial and is rejected; any argument that the government did not prove the type of methamphetamine involved in the offense is meritless and counsel could not be ineffective in deciding not to raise the issue; court concludes that counsel's decision not to independently withdraw over the fact that he had prosecuted Morales in state court was within the range of professional assistance; nor was counsel's decision not to withdraw over the suspensions of his licenses in Nebraska and South Dakota beyond the range of professional assistance; because all of Morales's grounds for his claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel are unavailing, he cannot show that he suffered any prejudice from the manner in which counsel handled his direct appeal; claims of prosecutorial misconduct rejected without comment.
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.