United States v. Miguel Hernandez-Munguia

MEMORANDUM

Federal prisoner Miguel Hernandez-Munguia appeals the district court’s judg ment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, alter, or set aside his sentence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (a). We review a district court’s denial of a § 2255 motion de novo, see United States v. Manzo, 675 F.3d 1204, 1209 (9th Cir.2012). We affirm.

Hernandez-Munguia was charged and convicted of, inter alia, conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine (count one) and conspiracy to possess a listed chemical with knowledge, or having reasonable cause to believe, that it would be used to manufacture methamphetamine (count two). He contends that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to object to counts one and two as multiplici-tous. The district court concluded that Hernandez-Munguia could not demonstrate prejudice because he received a concurrent sentence for counts one and two, and prejudice does not result from the collateral consequences of an extra conviction under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984) (to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel, defendant must show that counsel’s…