United States v. John Stuart Robertson

977 F.2d 593 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John Stuart ROBERTSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-36187. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 5, 1992. * Decided Oct. 15, 1992. Order Amending Decision Jan. 25, 1993. Before JAMES R. BROWNING, DAVID R. THOMPSON and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** OVERVIEW 2 John Stuart Robertson appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his second 28 U.S.C. § 2255 habeas corpus petition. Robertson contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel during his direct appeal because his attorney appealed a Brady claim without providing adequate supporting evidence. He argues supporting evidence for that claim became available when he filed his first section 2255 petition, but was precluded from consideration because of the previous unsupported appeal. 3 We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2253 and 2255 and affirm.…