United States v. Adrian Lacey ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 21-3737
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Adrian Lacey
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Delta
    ____________
    Submitted: May 12, 2022
    Filed: May 20, 2022
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before SHEPHERD, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Adrian Lacey, who was counseled below but is now proceeding pro se, appeals
    after he pleaded guilty to possessing a prohibited object in prison, and the district
    court1 sentenced him to 6 months in prison. On appeal, Lacey argues that his right
    to a speedy trial was violated, his guilty plea was involuntary, and his counsel was
    ineffective.
    Upon careful review, we conclude that Lacey waived any speedy trial claim by
    pleading guilty. See United States v. Cox, 
    985 F.2d 427
    , 433 (8th Cir. 1993) (claim
    that indictment should have been dismissed for violation of the Speedy Trial Act was
    waived by guilty plea); Speed v. United States, 
    518 F.2d 75
    , 76 (8th Cir. 1975) (“it
    is well settled that a plea of guilty waives any claim to denial of a speedy trial”).
    Further, the hearing transcript shows that he knowingly and voluntarily entered his
    guilty plea, despite his later filings asserting that he was innocent. See United States
    v. Green, 
    521 F.3d 929
    , 931 (8th Cir. 2008) (whether a plea was knowing and
    voluntary is reviewed de novo); Nguyen v. United States, 
    114 F.3d 699
    , 703 (8th Cir.
    1997) (defendant’s representations during plea-taking carry strong presumption of
    verity).
    Finally, we decline to address Lacey’s ineffective-assistance claim in this direct
    appeal. See United States v. Hernandez, 
    281 F.3d 746
    , 749 (8th Cir. 2002)
    (generally, ineffective-assistance claim is not cognizable on direct appeal).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable D.P. Marshall Jr., Chief Judge, United States District Court for
    the Eastern District of Arkansas.
    -2-