Published on: Wednesday, November 25, 2020

Petitioner-appellant Monta Anderson, an Illinois man who pleaded guilty to a conspiracy to distribute heroin, is entitled to a new hearing to argue that his counsel was ineffective because his defense attorney advised him to stipulate as part of his plea agreement that the heroin he distributed through the conspiracy caused the death of someone who also used drugs from another source, the Seventh Circuit ruled. The charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of twenty years’ imprisonment for a drug offense that resulted in death.

After sentencing, petitioner sought relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing that his counsel provided ineffective assistance in the plea-bargaining process. The district court denied Anderson’s petition without an evidentiary hearing, holding that Anderson’s counsel was not ineffective. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit disagreed finding Anderson was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

The Court found that Anderson’s attorney showed deficient performance by not investigating further the deceased's alleged heroin purchases from other sources and his attorney also did not consult appropriate experts, and a “reasonable probability” existed that his case would have gone to trial absent his attorney’s deficiencies.

The Circuit court vacated the district court’s denial of Anderson’s petition and remanded for rehearing.

The case is United States v. Anderson, No. 19-01257, (7th Cir. Nov. 23, 2020).