Thorward

MEMORANDUM ***

Petitioner Robin Thorward alleges in a pro se habeas petition that Marta Stanton, his court-appointed appellate lawyer, filed a notice abandoning the direct appeal of his state criminal conviction, contrary to his explicit instructions. He maintains that this decision by Stanton caused him to receive unconstitutional ineffective assistance of counsel.

We must remand to the district court for an evidentiary hearing if Thorward has “allege[d] specific facts which, if true, would entitle him to relief.” Earp v. Ornoski 431 F.3d 1158 , 1167 & n. 4 (9th Cir.2005) (quoting Ortiz v. Stewart, 149 F.3d 923, 934 (9th Cir.1998)) (internal quotation marks omitted), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 2295 , 164 L.Ed.2d 834 (2006). Thorward’s allegations meet this standard.

Under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), an ineffective assistance of counsel claim requires the defendant to show deficient performance and prejudice. Id. at 687 , 104 S.Ct. 2052 . The Supreme Court applied Strickland to the failure to prosecute an appeal in Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470 , 120 S.Ct. 1029 , 145 L.Ed.2d 985 (2000). Flores-Ortega held that a…