Stevenson v. USA-2255, No. 8:2020cv01483 - Document 2 (D. Md. 2023)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Peter J. Messitte on 1/25/2023. (ols, Deputy Clerk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Stevenson v. USA-2255 Doc. 2 Case 8:20-cv-01483-PJM Document 2 Filed 01/25/23 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, V. Grim No. 17-cr-443-PJM DELONTE JAMEL STEVENSON Petitioner-Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Petitioner Delonte Jamel Stevenson has filed a Motion to Vacate his Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. EOF No. 48. No hearing is necessary. See e.g.. United States v. White, 366 F.3d 291, 302(4th Cir. 2004). For the reasons that follow,the Court DENIES the Motion. T. Background On February 28,2018, Stevenson pled guilty to Count 1 of an Indictment charging him to be a Felon in Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). ECF No. 18. Stevenson had previously been convicted of offenses punishable by more than one year of imprisonment, which precluded him from possessing a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). ECF No. 24. On August 10, 2018, he was sentenced to a total of66 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised release, plus a $100 special assessment. ECF No. 33. On July 23, 2019,the Fourth Circuit affirmed the decision ofthe Court as to the length of Stevenson's sentence. ECF No.43. On June 10, 2020, Stevenson filed his pending Motion to Vacate arguing that his "guilty plea under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) must be vacated in light ofthe Supreme Court's decision in Rehaif V. United States, 139 S. Ct 2191X2019)." ECF No.48 at 1. The Court disagrees. -1- Dockets.Justia.com Case 8:20-cv-01483-PJM Document 2 Filed 01/25/23 Page 2 of 4 Case 8:20-cv-01483-PJM Document 2 Filed 01/25/23 Page 3 of 4 .. Case 8:20-cv-01483-PJM Document 2 Filed 01/25/23 Page 4 of 4 requirement under Rehaif. Thus, he has not demonstrated that the Court_' s · error affected his rights. IV. Certificate of Appealability Pursuant to Rule 1 l(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings, the Court is -required to "issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant." A certificate ofappealability will not issue absent "a substantial showing ofthe denial of a constitutional right." 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). A petitioner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong, and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S. Ct. 1029, 154 L. Ed. 2d 931 (2003); Slackv. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,484, 120 S. Ct. 1595, 146 L. Ed. 2d 542 (2000). The Court has considered the record and finds that Hernandez has _not made the requisite . ,- showing. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, Stevenson's Motion to Vacate (ECF No. 48) is DENIED, and the.Court DENIES a certificate of appealability. A separate order will ISSUE. PETER J. MESSITTE Date: JanuaryV , 2023 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -4-
]]>
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.
