United States v. Johnson

MEMORANDUM **

Larry Dale Johnson, a former federal prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his conviction and sentence, based on stipulated facts, for narcotics and fraud violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253 , and we affirm.

Johnson raises various contentions of ineffective assistance of counsel, most of which are barred as vague, conclusory, and unsupported by any citation to relevant case law or to the record. See Hendricks v. Vasquez, 908 F.2d 490, 491 (9th Cir. 1990). To the extent they are not otherwise barred, we reject them on the merits. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Johnson’s closest contention is that his counsel was ineffective for not properly *777 investigating whether he was competent to enter into a plea agreement. The record reflects that, at the time Johnson entered into his plea agreement to a stipulated facts trial, he was taking several different medications and suffered from bipolar disorder.

This court has held that a defendant’s statement that he was under the influence of a strong narcotic is sufficient to…