How would the paragraphs presented in part A and part B be corrected using the following checklist for proofreading?

Proofreading Checklist. Checklist to be used when Proofreading Legal Writing:

General Considerations

Spelling

Numbers

Formal writing conventions

Sentence Structure/Pattern

Subject/verb distance

Sentence length

Active/passive voice

Action verbs

Transitions

Punctuation

Commas

Semicolons

Colons

Apostrophes

Quotations

Ellipses

Brackets

Parentheses

Hyphens

Dashes

Grammar

Subject/verb agreement

Verb tense

Parallel construction

Superfluous verbs

Modifiers and infinitives

Noun/pronoun agreement

Paragraphs

Topic sentence

Body

Closing

Transition sentence

Paragraph length

Word Selection and Usage

Excessive/redundant words

Noun/verb string

Nominalizations

Legalese

Archaic words

Sexist language

Specific wordsproblem areas

Part A

The governments' first witness at Bean's sentencing were the DEA Task Force Officer Tony Silva. He testifies that in his debriefing Luiz had told him about four seperate marijuana "grows" in which For Further Reading O'Conner, Patricia T. Woe Is I: The Grammarphobe's Guide to Better English in Plain English, 3rd Ed. New York: Penguin Group, 2009. Zinsser, William. On Writing Well, 7th ed. New York: Harper Collins, 2006. Garner, Bryan A. The Redbook: A Manual on Legal Style, 3rd ed. St. Paul: West Academic, 2013. Garner, Bryan A. Legal Writing in Plain English, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013. Copyright 2018 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. Luiz had participated. The first was in 1986 In Tress, Texas: this "grow" produced 700 marijuana plants. The second was in 1987 in the Tonto wilderness; and it produced approximatly 1500 marijuana plants. The third "grow" was in 1988 in Sies Colorado and they produced approximately 900 marijuana plants. The final "grow" was in 1991, also at the Sies site. Before the plants in this grow had been harveted, a Colorado State Police aircraft was spotted doing a "flyover" of the property. This prompted Luiz to completely destroy the crop, only fifty two plants were seized. As they were seized the officers noted that two or three plants were in a single grow site. Approximately 1,000 "grow holes," with sprinkler heads connected to an extensive irritation system, were found another one thousand uninstalled sprinkler heads, two water tanks and fertilizer also was found on the property.

Part B

The trial court sentenced Smith well within the statutory limits. Therefore the sentence is legal. The record thoroughly, clearly and positively shows that Smith and his attorney have ample time to thoroughly review Smiths' sentence report prior to sentencing. They did so and had: "no problems with it." It is shown by the record that Smith never appealed his conviction or sentence. His section 2255 Motion were his first and only attempt to challenge his sentence. Any objections to the sentence report as submitted were clearly waived by Smith. The defendant have the responsibility to advise the Court of any claimed errors in the sentence report. His failure to voice any objections waive any issue not properly presented. It has been long held by this court that "Section 2255 is not available to test the legality of matters which should have been raised on appeal." Unless good cause can be shown why a defendant did not appeal or raise a particular issue on appeal; the defendant is barred from raising that issue in a section 2255 Motion.