United States v. Panfilo Zavala-Angulo

78 F.3d 596 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Panfilo ZAVALA-ANGULO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-35562. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 27, 1996. * Decided March 5, 1996. Before: PREGERSON, CANBY, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Panfilo Zavala-Angulo appeals pro se the denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. Zavala-Angulo contends the district court erred by denying his motion because: (1) his counsel was ineffective; (2) the court should have granted him leave for discovery and appointed counsel to assist him with his ineffective assistance claim; (3) he was entitled to a downward departure; and (4) the court incorrectly calculated his criminal history category. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court's denial of Zavala-Angulo's § 2255 motion, Frazer v. United States, 18 F.3d 778, 781…