Rodney Capell v. James Gomez Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General of the State of California

15 F.3d 1083 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Rodney CAPELL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. James GOMEZ; Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General of the State of California, Respondents-Appellees. No. 93-55496. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 27, 1993. * Decided Dec. 17, 1993. Before: KILKENNY, SNEED, and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Rodney Capell appeals pro se from the district court's denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2254 , arguing that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his attorney did not file an appeal from Capell's conviction and sentence following his entry of a guilty plea. We review de novo the district court's legal conclusion while examining for clear error its factual findings. See Woods v. Sheehan, 987 F.2d 1454, 1456 (9th Cir.1993). We affirm. 3 In United States v. Horodner, 993 F.2d 191 (9th Cir.1993) we held that defense counsel's failure to file a…