United States v. Mark Steven Ayala
Docket: 01-3615
Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit; December 26, 2002; Federal Appellate Court
Mark Steven Ayala pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, cocaine, cocaine base, and marijuana, and using a minor for drug distribution, resulting in a 360-month prison sentence and ten years of supervised release. He did not appeal his sentence but subsequently filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which the district court denied, issuing a certificate of appealability. Ayala submitted two opening briefs for the appeal, ultimately choosing to rely on the second one, leading to the exclusion of issues raised in the first brief, including ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel and sentencing disparities. In his appeal, Ayala argued that his convictions violated the ruling in Apprendi v. New Jersey, but the court reaffirmed its prior ruling in United States v. Moss, which states that such claims cannot be raised on collateral review. Ayala's request for an en banc hearing was denied. Additionally, Ayala claimed the government breached the plea agreement by not conducting an immediate debriefing that could have led to a downward departure motion for substantial assistance. The court found no breach, as the agreement imposed a unilateral obligation on Ayala to be debriefed, while leaving the government's decision to file a substantial-assistance motion to its sole discretion. The court affirmed the district court's judgment and denied the government's motion to strike portions of Ayala's briefs as moot.