United States v. Lorna Faux

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NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Lorna FAUX, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-16146. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 25, 1996. * Decided June 28, 1996. Before: NOONAN, LEAVY, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Lorna Faux appeals the district court's denial of her 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Faux contends that the district court erroneously calculated the amount of loss under U.S.S.G. § 2F1.1, and that counsel was ineffective at sentencing for failing to challenge the amount of loss, for failing to make a sentence manipulation argument, and for not arguing for a downward departure. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291 , 2255. We review the denial of the motion de novo, Frazer v. United States, 18 F.3d 778, 781 (9th Cir.1994), and any factual findings for clear error, Doganiere v. United States, 914 F.2d 165, 167 (9th Cir.1990), cert.…