Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Jesus Acosta Aceveda, 96-3195 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Number: 96-3195 Visitors: 17
Filed: May 01, 1997
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 113 F.3d 1247 97 CJ C.A.R. 648 NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesus Acosta A
More

113 F.3d 1247

97 CJ C.A.R. 648

NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Jesus Acosta ACEVEDA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 96-3195.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

May 1, 1997.

Before TACHA, BALDOCK and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

ORDER*

LUCERO, Circuit Judge.

1

Appellant, Jesus Acosta-Aceveda, requests the grant of a certificate of appealability to review the effectiveness of his counsel at trial. We have reviewed the record and briefs submitted by appellant in their entirety and conclude that he has not made a substantial showing of the denial of his constitutional rights to effective assistance of counsel.

2

Having concluded that he has not made the necessary showing to obtain a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1), we DENY the grant of a certificate of appealability, and DECLINE to review the merits of the judgment of the district court.

*

The case is unanimously ordered submitted without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 34(a) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. This order is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders; nevertheless, an order may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer