Callahan

United States v. Callahan

Good Law
102 F. App'x 608
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 24, 2004No. 02-15960; D.C. Nos. CV-97-00515-RGS; CR-89-178-PHX-RGSCalifornia457 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Gary Patrick Callahan appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his motion to alter or amend the judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and the district court’s denial of his motion for an evidentiary hearing. Callahan’s § 2255 motion challenges his jury conviction and 330-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846. We affirm in part, vacate in part and remand for an evidentiary hearing.

Callahan contends that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to investigate or make known to the jury the alleged romantic relationship between a central prosecution witness and Callahan’s then-girlfriend, co-defendant Lindstrom. Callahan farther contends that counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to utilize available forensic evidence. The motion and the record of the case do not “conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief’ with regard to these claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Leonti, 326 F.3d 1111, 1116 (9th Cir.2003); 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . Accordingly, we vacate the…

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.