DWIGHT BULLARD v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - Articles

All Content

DWIGHT BULLARD v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 4, 2019

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1:

ARGUED: Samantha M. Goldstein, O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Rebecca C. Lutzko, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 2:

ON BRIEF: Samantha M. Goldstein, O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP, Washington, D.C., Anton Metlitsky, O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP, New York, New York, for Appellant. Rebecca C. Lutzko, Danielle K. Angeli, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee. Dwight Bullard, Lisbon, Ohio, pro se.

Judge(s): GUY, THAPAR, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges.

Court Appealed: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland.

NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judge. Dwight Bullard pleaded guilty to distributing heroin and being a felon in possession of a firearm. At sentencing, the district court determined that Bullard qualified as a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines. Bullard now challenges that determination, arguing that his Arizona conviction for attempting to sell drugs is not a “controlled substance offense.”

To get around this prohibition, Bullard also argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial and appellate counsel failed to object to his status as a career offender. While this claim is at least cognizable under § 2255, it fares no better. Bullard cannot satisfy his heavy burden under Strickland. As a result, we affirm the denial of Bullard’s petition.

Attachments: