United States v. Santos Murillo

Good Law
484 F. App'x 201
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 20, 201211-35598California630 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Petitioner Santos Peter Murillo (“Murillo”) seeks habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 , claiming that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to argue that two prior offenses in his presentence report — a gun charge and a harassment charge, which occurred on the same day — should have been considered related and treated as a single case for computation of his criminal history. He claims that if the offenses had been treated as related, he would have had a criminal history category of III instead of IV and, therefore, would likely have received a lower sentence.

This Court reviews a district court’s denial of habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 de novo. Lopez v. Schriro, 491 F.3d 1029, 1036 (9th Cir.2007). To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, a petitioner has to show that counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; he must establish both that his counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced his defense. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). The second prong of Strickland is met when there is a reasonable…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.