Jose M. Lozada v. George Deeds, Warden Brian McKay Attorney General for the State of Nevada

Bad Law
92 Daily Journal DAR 6788·964 F.2d 956·1992 WL 104479·1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 11003·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4296
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 20, 199290-15621California980 words

Opinion

Opinion

Leavy, J.

Appellant Jose M. Lozada, a Nevada prisoner, petitioned under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. He alleged that his trial attorney failed “to advise petitioner of his right to appeal, the procedure and time limits involved, and of his right to appointed counsel on appeal.” He alleged further “he did nothing to protect me— filing the notice of appeal, nor informed the court at sentencing of my financial status in order to insure assistance of counsel for my first appeal.”

Relying on Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), the district court dismissed the petition, stating: “Lozada completely fails to demonstrate any prejudice that has resulted because counsel’s deficiency.” Lozada did not identify any issue he would have raised on appeal nor did he demonstrate that an appeal might succeed.

The district court denied Lozada’s request for a certificate of probable cause to appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . We also denied the certificate of probable cause consistent with our previous cases. See United States v. Lewis, 880 F.2d 243 (9th Cir.1989); United States v. Popoola, 881 F.2d 811

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.