United States v. George v. Hansen

66 F.3d 336 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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-Appellant, v. George V. HANSEN, Defendant-Appellee. No. 95-35094. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 5, 1995. * Decided Sept. 8, 1995. Before: GOODWIN, WIGGINS and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 George V. Hansen appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence. Hansen contends that he received ineffective assistance of appellate counsel and that his due process rights were violated by the judge's failure to appoint counsel on appeal. For the first time on appeal, Hansen contends that he also received ineffective assistance at trial and that a recent Supreme Court decision mandates vacating his sentence. 1 We review de novo a district court's decision on a Sec. 2255 motion. Grady v. United States, 929 F.2d 468, 470 (9th Cir.1991). We have jurisdiction pursuant to…