United States v. Patrick Prudhomme

26 F.3d 134 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Patrick PRUDHOMME, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-55949. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 24, 1994. * Decided June 7, 1994. Before: HUG, D.W. NELSON, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Patrick Prudhomme appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. Prudhomme contends that he is entitled to a maximum sentence of ten years and that the trial court failed to depart downward for mitigating circumstances. The district court found that Prudhomme's claims were without merit. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 , and we review de novo the district court's decision on a 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion. United States v. Moore, 921 F.2d 207, 209 (9th Cir.1990). We affirm. 3 Prudhomme contends that he is entitled to a maximum sentence of ten years. This contention lacks…