United States v. Jeffrey Scott Depenbrock

79 F.3d 1154 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Jeffrey Scott DEPENBROCK, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-10565. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted March 11, 1996. * Decided March 19, 1996. Before: THOMPSON, KLEINFELD and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 We do not decide Depenbrock's ineffective assistance of counsel claim. " '[T]he customary procedure in this Circuit for challenging the effectiveness of defense counsel in a federal criminal trial is by collateral attack on the conviction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , and this Court has been chary of analyzing insufficiency of counsel claims on direct appeal.' " United States v. Rewald, 889 F.2d 836, 859 (1989), amended, 902 F.2d 18 (9th Cir.1990) (quoting United States v. Schaflander, 743 F.2d 714, 717 (9th Cir.1984)). The purpose behind this general rule is to "permit[ ] the defendant to develop a record as to what counsel did, why…