United States v. Rico

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
United States v. Rico, 407 F. App'x 255 (9th Cir. 2011)
Clifton, Goodwin, Wallace

United States v. Rico

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Federal prisoner Armando Garcia Rico appeals from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for relief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2258, and we affirm.

Rico contends that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to appeal the district court’s sentence following a limited remand under United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc). Counsel here did not have a constitutionally imposed duty to consult with Rico about an appeal and therefore did not provide ineffective assistance by not filing an appeal. See Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 480, 120 S.Ct. 1029, 145 L.Ed.2d 985 (2000).

Rico’s motion to supplement the record is denied. See Fed. R.App. P. 10(e); Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896, 900 n. 4 (9th Cir. 2001).

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Reference

Full Case Name
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee v. Armando Garcia RICO, Defendant—Appellant
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published