United States v. Peter Gordon Howe

9 F.3d 1554 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Peter Gordon HOWE, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-36923. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 2, 1993. * Decided Nov. 10, 1993. Before: WRIGHT, GOODWIN and HUG, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Peter Gordon Howe appeals the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and to defraud the United States. He seeks an evidentiary hearing. We affirm. 3 We review de novo the district court's denial of the motion. United States v. Angelone, 894 F.2d 1129, 1130 (9th Cir.1990). Findings of fact are reviewed for clear error. Thomas v. Brewer, 923 F.2d 1361, 1364 (9th Cir.1991). We review for an abuse of discretion a district court's denial of an evidentiary hearing on a § 2255 motion. Watts v. United States, 841 F.2d 275, 277 (9th Cir.1988). A…