Free Reply/Response Misc - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

I ****7*-·····-··*· ·· ···· — —··-·-·~~ - V- V--- -```--- ·—~-~·-—--·--r~-r.~·-··-.-----~....—..L...,.,.. ... `....... . ...... ;......_.__;____________________ ______ ___________w 4___ ___ __________________ A7w_fm___“___n“AM*'“" I---- n Ahn V U H mu V Li
. · Case 3:00-cr-00069-AHN Document 229 Filed 12/05/2005 Page 1 of 3 E
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT §:El“§i[)
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT =
ZUU5 DEC -5 Q U= U2 1
UNITED STATES OE AMERICA : CRIM. NO. 3:00CR69(AHN)
= CIV- NO- 3=O@$V0Ii58"R1AiEm0ll§£‘&‘ y
= BRMGEPGRY Cl =
v. :
: December 5, 2005
CLINTON COX :
GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO NEW AUTHORITY CITED BY
DEFENDANT IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION PURSUANT TO
28 U.S.C. § 2255 TO VACATE, SET ASIDE, OR CORRECT
SENTENCE E
On approximately August 9, 2004, the defendant forwarded to Q
- the Clerk of the Court a petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
In his petition, the defendant asserts three principal grounds in
support of his motion. The Government has addressed those claims
in earlier pleadings. y ,
On approximately October ld, 2005, the defendant forwarded
to the Clerk of the Court a letter citing allegedly new authority
in support of his pending motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. In his
I
motion, the defendant cites United States v. Cordoba—Murgas, 422

F.3d 65 (2m Cir. 2005). There, the Second Circuit held that, if
a defendant has been indicted for a narcotics offense involving
an unspecified quantity of narcotics, the defendant cannot be
sentenced above the statutory maximum for an indeterminate T
quantity of drugs as established in 21 U.S.C. § 84l(b)(l)(C) ‘
even where the defendant admits the quantity of narcotics during U
a plea allocution.
i
*L`****`*TT**+vf~+#e—~5- llnlnlnlnlnll

I
' ` Case 3:00-cr-00069-AHN Document 229 Filed 12/05/2005 Page 2 of3
Cordoba—Murgas, however, does not apply here. Here, the
defendant was charged in a Superseding Indictment with conspiring
to possess with the intent to distribute and to distribute fifty
grams or more of cocaine base in violation of 2l U.S.C. §§ 846 E
I
I
and 84l(a)(l)(Count One) and three counts of possessing with the
intent to distribute and distribution of cocaine base in i
violation of 2l U.S.C. §84l(a)(l) (Counts Four, Seven, and Ten .
A jury convicted him after trial of each of those offenses and
specifically found that the defendant conspired to possess with
the intent to distribute and to distribute fifty grams or more of
cocaine base. As a result of the jury’s verdict and the
Government's filing of a notice of its intent to seek enhanced
penalties pursuant to 2l U.S.C. § 851, the defendant was subject

to a term of imprisonment of a mandatory minimum term of twenty
years and a statutory maximum term of life pursuant to section
I
84l(b)(l)(A). The district court thus sentenced him within the
statutory maximum set forth in section 8dl(b)(l)(A).
Respectfully submitted,
K TN J. O' ONs•=
@ D STAT OR I
r ,/_M _=,.
,,~· ‘ USTA ITED STA S ATTORNEY g
* pled St. es Attorney’s Office
~ited States Courthouse
915 Lafayette Boulevard
Bridgeport, CT 06604 “
Tel: (203) 696-3000
Federal Bar No. CTl5203
I wwwm____”m*”—“_~—__*———mm_____”“F_—__—_——_*___““““an_m_-_mmn—*”_————_*___—_WTHMmAm——

` ` Case 3:00-cr-00069-AHN Document 229 Filed 12/05/2005 Page3of3
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing has been
mailed via First Class Mail, postage prepaid, on December 5, 2005
to:
Clinton D. Cox
Inmate No. 13883-014
USP Lewisburg J ‘
P.O. Box 1000 Q
Lewisburg, PA 17837 -,J*1" ··‘·‘ __.,· F, I
1.\•' r· I
y ..·· 1ES 4 NNERTY y
Y FIS * NITED ST”TES ATTORNEY

I
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1