Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
David Powell v. United States
Citations: 73 F.3d 362; 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 40734; 1995 WL 750537Docket: 95-1536
Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; December 17, 1995; Federal Appellate Court
David Powell, a pro se federal prisoner, appealed the denial of his motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 by the district court. Powell had pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute, resulting in a sentence of 135 months, to run concurrently with a separate five-year term. He did not appeal his conviction or sentence initially. In his motion to vacate, Powell raised three claims: (1) the constitutionality of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846, (2) a due process violation due to lack of regulation publication in the Federal Register regarding his drug activity, and (3) ineffective assistance of counsel for not challenging the statutes’ constitutionality. The district court denied his motion. On appeal, Powell introduced new arguments, including a claim of a defective indictment and double jeopardy, as well as different grounds for ineffective assistance of counsel. However, these issues were not presented in the district court, and the appellate court noted that it typically does not consider issues not raised below unless exceptional circumstances exist, which were not present in this case. Furthermore, Powell abandoned his original claims by not raising them on appeal. Consequently, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment, citing that Powell's new claims were not reviewable due to their absence from the lower court proceedings and that the original claims were also abandoned.