United States v. Joshua Kistler

Good Law
412 F. App'x 1
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 23, 201009-35968California407 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Joshua Kistler appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion to vacate, set aside and correct sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm.

Kistler contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel did not make adequate efforts to obtain the documents underlying the victim’s claim that Kistler’s conduct caused her psychological injuries. But trial counsel did make such efforts, by sending letters demanding that she be able to review the relevant documents and by voicing concerns that the victim’s psychological injuries were unrelated to Kistler’s conduct. Trial counsel could have reasonably concluded that her concerns regarding the victim’s claimed psychological harms were noted in the presentence report and would be resolved at a later restitution hearing. Thus Kistler has not demonstrated that trial counsel’s performance fell short of prevailing professional norms or was unreasonable under the circumstances. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Kistler also argues that counsel’s allegedly deficient performance caused prejudice at…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.