United States v. Cantey
United States v. Cantey
Opinion of the Court
SUMMARY ORDER
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of said district court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.
Appellant Cantey was convicted after a jury trial of being a felon in possession of ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e), and theft of a firearm from a federally licensed firearm dealer, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(u). He appeals, arguing that his trial counsel provided him with constitutionally deficient assistance by failing to present his argument that the theft had been committed by Linda Robinson.
In order to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show (1) that his attorney’s “performance was deficient ... [by] showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment” and (2) that “the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- United States v. Andre K. CANTEY
- Status
- Published