United States v. Ramon Angel Caro

990 F.2d 1261 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Ramon Angel CARO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-56172. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 10, 1993. * Decided March 17, 1993. Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and FARRIS and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Ramon Angel Caro, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. Caro pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute cocaine. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , and we reverse. 3 A defendant in a federal criminal prosecution is not entitled to have "a direct appeal and a section 2255 proceeding considered simultaneously in an effort to overturn the conviction and sentence." Jack v. United States, 435 F.2d 317, 318 (9th Cir.1970), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 933 (1971). The reason that a district court should not entertain a habeas…