United States v. Billy Dean Petersen
Opinion
Opinion
95 F.3d 1160 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Billy Dean PETERSEN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-36214. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 12, 1996. * Decided Aug. 19, 1996. Before: BROWNING, SCHROEDER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Billy Dean Petersen, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging the restitution order imposed following his jury conviction for transporting stolen property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2314 and possessing and disposing of such property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2315 . Petersen contends that his $25,000 restitution order should be modified or set aside because his attorney at sentencing rendered ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to introduce evidence of recovered property. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , and we affirm. 3 We…