United States v. Philip C. Manning

91 F.3d 156 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Philip C. MANNING, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-16902. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 9, 1996. * Decided July 15, 1996. Before: HUG, Chief Judge, SCHROEDER and POOLE, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Philip Manning pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy to possess and distribute marijuana and possession with the intent to distribute marijuana. He appeals the district court's denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . We affirm. 3 We reject Manning's contention that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. His attorney's waiver of the preliminary hearing in exchange for "full and complete open file discovery" was a reasonable tactical decision. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 689-91 (1984). Additionally, Manning has not demonstrated prejudice from his counsels' other alleged errors. See…