Vidales

United States v. Vidales

Good Law
143 F. App'x 52
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 4, 2005No. 04-16268California333 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Irma Bejines Vidales (“Petitioner”) appeals the district court’s denial of the habeas petition brought under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . We affirm.

Petitioner’s trial attorney did not provide ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to locate, interview, and subpoena a potential exculpatory witness. The district court determined that although the attorney attempted to locate the witness, no one knew how to find him. This finding was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Lang, 149 F.3d 1044, 1046 (9th Cir.1998). Furthermore, evidence in the record indicates that the witness did not want to be found, so even if the attorney had taken down the witness’s address at the meeting he attended with Vidales, there is no evidence supporting a conclusion that the witness would have been found at that address later. An attorney’s failure to locate an exculpatory witness does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel when evidence indicates the witness is in hiding.

Petitioner has also failed to demonstrate that her trial attorney actively represented conflicting interests which affected her attorney’s performance. See Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 348 ,…

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.