Haight

MEMORANDUM

Patrick J. Haight (“Haight”), a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his ninety-two month sentence for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 (g) and 924(e). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 , 2253, and 2255. We review a district court’s decision to either deny or grant a federal prisoner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion de novo, see United States v. Chacon-Palomares, 208 F.3d 1157, 1158 (9th Cir.2000), and we review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo, see United States v. Span, 75 F.3d 1383 (9th Cir.1996) (evaluating claim raised in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion). For the reasons below, we vacate and remand.

We granted a certificate of appealability on the issue of whether Haight’s counsel was ineffective for failing to file a notice of appeal. A defendant alleging ineffective assistance of counsel must show both that counsel’s representation, “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness” and that the attorney’s deficient performance prejudiced the defendant. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694 , 104 S.Ct.…