Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Young v. Quintana

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Central Division, Lexington

July 12, 2018

DAZZLE YOUNG, Petitioner,
v.
FRANCISCO QUINTANA, Warden, Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          Joseph M. Hood Senior U.S. District Judge.

         Dazzle Young is a prisoner confined at the Federal Medical Center (“FMC”)-Lexington in Lexington, Kentucky. Proceeding without a lawyer, Young has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. [R. 1] This matter is before the Court to conduct the initial screening of the petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2243. Alexander v. Northern Bureau of Prisons, 419 Fed.Appx. 544, 545 (6th Cir. 2011).

         I.

         On February 8, 2012, a jury in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio found Young guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Prior to trial, the United States filed a notice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) that, if Young was found guilty, he would be subject to an enhanced sentence pursuant to the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), as Young has at least three prior convictions for a “violent felony” or “serious drug offense, ” or both, committed on separate occasions. The convictions upon which the United States indicated that it would rely for the sentencing enhancement included the following:

1. Rape and Kidnapping, in Case Number 31482, in the Summit County Common Pleas Court, on or about July 26, 1962;
2. Aggravated Assault and Aggravated Trafficking, in Case Number CR 88 05 0704, in the Summit County Common Pleas Court, on or about November 18, 1988;
3. Aggravated Trafficking, in Case Number CR 92 07 1643, in the Summit County Common Pleas Court, on or about November 18, 1992;
4. Attempted Felonious Assault, in Case Number CR 93 10 2510, in the Summit County Common Pleas Court, on or about March 31, 2000; and
5. Conspiracy to Distribute and Possession with Intent to Distribute and Distribution of Cocaine, in the United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio, No. 5:07CR563-13, on or about June 13, 2008.

United States v. Young, No. 5:11-cr-328-JG-1 (2011) at R. 51.

         Prior to sentencing, Young objected to the determination that he is an armed career criminal. Id. at R. 80. However, at sentencing, the trial court found that “there is more than sufficient evidence to support the finding that he comes under the armed career criminal classification, ” and found that each of his prior convictions were qualifying offenses, thus subjecting Young to the 15-year (180-month) mandatory minimum sentence under § 924(e)(1). [Id. at R. 112, p. 5]

         However, rather than sentence Young to the 180-month mandatory minimum sentence under § 924(e)(1), the trial court considered Young's recommended sentence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. For purposes of Young's Sentencing Guidelines calculation, the trial court set Young's offense level at 33 and his Criminal History Category at IV, with a recommended Guideline range of 188 to 235 months. [Id. at p. 7, 9] The trial court considered the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and sentenced Young to “a guideline sentence, but at the low end” of 188-months imprisonment. [Id. at p. 11; R. 83]

         The Sixth Circuit affirmed Young's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. United States v. Young, No. 12-3645 (6th Cir. Jan. 31, 2014). Young filed a habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing that he was entitled to relief from his conviction on ineffective assistance of counsel grounds, but this motion was denied. United States v. Young, No. 5:11-cr-328-JG-1 (2011) at R. 116, 141.

         In his current § 2241 petition, Young seeks relief from his sentence on the grounds that: 1) he is “actually innocent” of the crime for which he was convicted; and 2) he was sentenced as an ACCA offender based on prior convictions that do not qualify as predicate offenses under the ACCA. [R. 1 at p. 2] However, Young's petition ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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