Joseph
United States v. Joseph
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Jeffery Joseph appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 *296 motion challenging his conviction and 151-month sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to attempting to possess with intent to distribute more than 100 grams of crystal methamphetamine, “ice,” in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , we review de novo, United States v. Chacon-Palomares, 208 F.3d 1157, 1158 (9th Cir.2000), and we affirm.
Joseph contends that his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by failing to raise two jurisdictional challenges. Both would have been frivolous. See 18 U.S.C. § 3231 (giving district courts jurisdiction of all offenses against the laws of the United States); United States v. Lorenzo, 995 F.2d 1448, 1456 (9th Cir.1993) (rejecting jurisdictional challenge by defendant Hawaiian nationals).
Accordingly, there was no ineffective assistance of counsel. See Boag v. Raines, 769 F.2d 1341, 1344 (9th Cir.1985) (concluding that failure to raise meritless arguments does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel).
Joseph also contends that Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147…