United States v. Walker, 07-10652 (2009)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 07-10652
Visitors: 17
Filed: May 08, 2009
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 8, 2009 No. 07-10652 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JAMES DARRELL WALKER Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:07-CV-006 Before WIENER, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Petitioner James Darrell Walker (“Walker”) sought a Certificate of Appealability
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED May 8, 2009 No. 07-10652 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. JAMES DARRELL WALKER Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 5:07-CV-006 Before WIENER, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Petitioner James Darrell Walker (“Walker”) sought a Certificate of Appealability ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
May 8, 2009
No. 07-10652 Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JAMES DARRELL WALKER
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:07-CV-006
Before WIENER, STEWART and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Petitioner James Darrell Walker (“Walker”) sought a Certificate of
Appealability (“COA”) to appeal the district court’s denial of his habeas corpus
petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Walker contended that he received
ineffective assistance of counsel (“IAC”) because his attorney failed to file a
direct appeal on his behalf after he, Walker, asked the lawyer to do so. After
granting Walker a COA on the IAC claim, narrowly construed as the single
question whether Walker’s lawyer failed to file the appeal, we remanded the case
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. 07-10652
to the district court for the limited purpose of conducting an evidentiary hearing
into whether Walker had in fact requested that his attorney file a direct appeal,
and we retained jurisdiction.
The district court concluded on remand that (1) on the advice of his
counsel, Walker decided not to file a direct appeal,1 and (2) Walker signed a
document attesting to that fact. As this finding squarely forecloses Walker’s IAC
claim, his petition for habeas corpus is DENIED.
1
Walker pleaded guilty to drug charges, which plea agreement included a waiver of
appeal. Apparently, Walker’s attorney told him that attempting to appeal following such a
waiver would be very difficult and advised against it. Walker then agreed.
2
Source: CourtListener