Moreno

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Rodolfo Moreno appeals the district court’s denial of his federal habeas petition, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . We affirm.

As the parties are familiar with the facts, we recite them only as necessary. We review the denial of Moreno’s § 2255 motion de novo. See United States v. Day, 285 F.3d 1167, 1169 (9th Cir.2002). We accept the district court’s findings of fact, and its adoption of the magistrate judge’s findings of fact, unless clearly erroneous. Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a); Sanders v. Ratelle, 21 F.3d 1446, 1452 (9th Cir.1994).

Moreno contends that trial counsel Clay Hernandez ineffectively represented him (1) by failing to investigate Jesus Castelo as a potential witness, (2) by failing to stipulate to Moreno’s underlying conviction, and (3) by continuing the trial. Moreno’s claims fail if he cannot prove that these allegedly deficient acts prejudiced his defense. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). To demonstrate prejudice, Moreno “must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for [Hernandez’s] unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. A…