Filed: Jun. 16, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-40929 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DANNY JAMES ANTOINE, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:96-CV-22 - - - - - - - - - - June 16, 1999 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Danny James Antoine, federal prisoner # 08011-035, appeals the district court’s den
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-40929 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus DANNY JAMES ANTOINE, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:96-CV-22 - - - - - - - - - - June 16, 1999 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Danny James Antoine, federal prisoner # 08011-035, appeals the district court’s deni..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-40929
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DANNY JAMES ANTOINE,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:96-CV-22
- - - - - - - - - -
June 16, 1999
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Danny James Antoine, federal prisoner # 08011-035, appeals
the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion.
Antoine argues that he was provided ineffective assistance
of counsel prior to pleading guilty because his counsel did not
file a motion to suppress. Antoine must prove he was prejudiced
by his counsel’s alleged deficient performance by showing a
reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would
not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 98-40929
-2-
trial. See Hill v. Lockhart,
474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985). Antoine
has not explained how he was prejudiced by his trial counsel’s
failure to file a motion to suppress. The district court did not
err when it denied Antoine’s motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
AFFIRMED.