United States v. Milton Brown

Good Law
990 F.2d 1261·1993 WL 98785·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 14179
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 5, 199392-55633California375 words

Opinion

Opinion

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NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Milton BROWN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-55633. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 23, 1993. * Decided April 5, 1993. Before WALLACE, Chief Judge, and FARRIS and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Milton Brown appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Brown argues that he was entrapped into possessing and selling cocaine. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , and we affirm. 3 We review de novo the district court's denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. United States v. Angelone, 894 F.2d 1129, 1130 (9th Cir.1990). 4 Issues raised and rejected on direct appeal cannot be the basis for a subsequent 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. United States v. Redd, 759 F.2d 699, 701 (9th Cir.1985). "The fact that the issue may be stated in different terms is of no significance." United…

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.