United States v. Huot Seng Lor

103 F.3d 142 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Huot Seng LOR, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-36258. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 2, 1996. * Decided Dec. 05, 1996. Before: SNEED, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Huot Seng Lor appeals pro se the district courts' denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Lor contends that: 1) the restitution amount imposed at sentencing is erroneous; 2) counsel was ineffective for failing to insist on an evidentiary hearing on the restitution amount; and 3) the district court erroneously denied an evidentiary hearing and discovery. We review de novo a district court's decision on a § 2255 motion. Sanchez v. United States, 50 F.3d 1448, 1451-52 (9th Cir.1995). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , and we affirm. 3 Lor has waived his claim that the district court erroneously determined the amount of…