United States v. Jeffrey Lee Barnett

87 F.3d 1323 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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 Lee BARNETT, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-35810. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 11, 1996. * Decided June 14, 1996. Before: CANBY, JOHN T. NOONAN, JR., and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Jeffrey Lee Barnett appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Barnett was convicted of conspiracy to manufacture, distribute and possess marijuana. He contends that the district court erred by denying his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review a district court's denial of a § 2255 motion de novo, see Frazer v. United States, 18 F.3d 778, 781 (9th Cir.1994), and we affirm. 3 Barnett contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when the attorney representing him at sentencing failed to dispute the amount of…