Mitchell v. U.S. 

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief, alleging that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately inform him of govt.’s plea offer and for failing to advise him of potential ramifications of rejecting 20-year sentence offer, under circumstances where defendant took case to trial and ultimately received life sentence on cocaine distribution charge. Record showed that defendant met with defense counsel three times prior to trial to discuss plea proposal, and defendant repeatedly rejected potential agreement. Moreover, counsel wrote defendant letter that outlined principal terms of plea proposal and advised him that he would likely face life sentence based upon potential testimony that defendant was involved in murder of witness in his instant drug case. Ct. found that counsel adequately conveyed all known terms of plea proposal, and counsel’s letter defeated any claim that defendant was unaware of potential outcome if he took case to trial. Also, defendant failed to show that there was reasonable probability that he would have accepted any plea offer.