Eduardo Rodriguez v. Jared Lozano

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 10, 202221-55051California902 words

Opinion

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FEB 10 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EDUARDO CHE RODRIGUEZ, No. 21-55051

Petitioner-Appellant, D.C. No. 5:19-cv-02127-GW-JDE v.

JARED LOZANO, MEMORANDUM*

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California George H. Wu, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 8, 2022** Pasadena, California

Before: SCHROEDER, TALLMAN, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.

Eduardo Che Rodriguez is serving a California prison sentence enhanced

under the State’s three-strikes law. Cal. Penal Code §§ 667(a), 667.6(b). Rodriguez

alleges that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by advising him to

concede that his 1993 New York rape conviction qualified as a strike. The

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).…

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.