United States v. Donald Nolan

39 F.3d 1189 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Donald NOLAN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-55838. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 17, 1994. * Decided Oct. 27, 1994. Before: BROWNING, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Donald Nolan, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. Nolan contends that the government breached the plea agreement, the district court should have enforced the agreement, and his defense attorney rendered ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and reverse and remand for further proceedings. 3 We review the legal issues presented in a 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion de novo and the underlying factual findings for clear error. United States v. Roberts, 5 F.3d 365, 368 (9th Cir.1993). 4 To state a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, a…