Garcia

Garcia v. Runnels

Good Law
146 F. App'x 112
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 11, 2005No. 03-56402; D.C. No CV-02-06613-ABC (SGL)California691 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

I

Petitioner-Appellant Jose Garcia appeals from the decision of the United States District Court for the Central District of California, which denied his petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 . On April 28, 2004, we issued a certificate of appealability on one issue raised by Garcia’s petition: Did trial counsel render ineffective assistance by giving erroneous advice regarding the sentence during plea negotiations?

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

II

In 1999, Garcia was charged with four counts of armed robbery, and two counts *113 of possession of a firearm by a felon. He was facing ten-year firearm enhancements, as well as application of California’s three-strikes laws. As a result, if convicted, he was facing multiple sentences of 35 years to life. Trial commenced on April 12, 2000. On the first day of trial, the trial court offered Garcia a plea bargain—if he pleaded guilty, he would receive a determinate sentence of 36 years. His counsel advised him of the plea offer during a five-minute conversation prior to trial. According to Garcia, his counsel told him that the court was offering a plea bargain…

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.