Paul Aduluije Aghaji v. United States

50 F.3d 13 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Paul Aduluije AGHAJI, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee. No. 94-56094. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 21, 1995. * Decided March 23, 1995. Before: SNEED, POOLE, and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Paul Aduluije Aghaji appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion to correct, vacate, or set aside his sentence. Aghaji contends that his counsel was ineffective by failing to preserve his appellate rights. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Secs. 1291 , 2255. We review de novo the denial of a section 2255 motion, Frazer v. United States, 18 F.3d 778, 781 (9th Cir.1994), and we vacate and remand. 3 We review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo. United States v. Swanson, 943 F.2d 1070, 1072 (9th Cir.1991). A criminal defendant's counsel is ineffective if he or she fails to file a timely notice…