Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Ingram

United States District Court, D. Maryland

October 17, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
WALTR LOUIS INGRAM Civil No. JFM-14-888

MEMORANDUM

J. FREDERICK MOTZ, District Judge.

Walter Louis Ingram has filed this action under 28 U.S.C. ยง2255. The motion will be denied.[1]

Ingram pled guilty and agreed to a sentence of 72 months. He complains that his trial counsel was ineffective in not conducting an adequate investigation and failing to suppress the wiretap evidence in the case. Ingram's claims in this respect are entirely conclusory and, as such, do not provide a basis for relief. See Nickerson v. Lee , 971 F.2d 1125, 1136 (4th Cir. 1992), abrog'd on other grounds , Yeasts v. Angelone , 166 F.3d 255 (4th Cir. 1999); United States v. Thomas , 221 F.3d 430, 437 (3rd Cir. 2000); Wilson v. United States , 962 F.2d 996, 968 (11th Cir. 1992).

Ingram also complains that his counsel was ineffective in not explaining to him the meaning of the word "stipulating." Ingram complains that he does not know what the word "stipulating" meant. Assuming that to be true, it is clear from the record that Ingram admitted under oath that the evidence that the Government said that it would produce against him was true.

A separate order denying Ingram's motion is being entered herewith.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.