Challenging convictions and sentences through federal collateral review.
When direct appeals are exhausted or ineffective, 28 U.S.C. §2255 provides a mechanism to challenge a federal conviction or sentence on constitutional grounds. These motions require precise legal analysis, thorough factual development, and strict compliance with procedural requirements including the one-year statute of limitations.
Our post-conviction work encompasses ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington, constructive amendment of the indictment, sentencing errors including incorrect guidelines calculations and improper enhancements, newly discovered evidence, changes in controlling law that apply retroactively, and prosecutorial misconduct including Brady and Giglio violations.
When a court denies relief, Rule 59(e) motions for reconsideration allow us to present new evidence, identify clear errors of law, or argue that the court's decision creates manifest injustice. These motions must be filed within strict deadlines and require identification of specific legal or factual errors in the court's analysis.
We obtain and review the complete trial record, sentencing transcripts, PSR, plea agreements, and prior appellate filings. We identify every viable ground for relief, assess the procedural posture including potential bars to review, and prepare comprehensive petitions with detailed memoranda of law. Every citation is verified against current authority.