Filed: Jul. 09, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-11023 Conference Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SAMUEL VALENZUELA RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:90-CR-056 - - - - - - - - - - June 27, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Samuel Ramirez, #20163-077, appeals the denial of his § 2255 motion bas
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-11023 Conference Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SAMUEL VALENZUELA RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:90-CR-056 - - - - - - - - - - June 27, 1996 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Samuel Ramirez, #20163-077, appeals the denial of his § 2255 motion base..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-11023
Conference Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
SAMUEL VALENZUELA RAMIREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:90-CR-056
- - - - - - - - - -
June 27, 1996
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Samuel Ramirez, #20163-077, appeals the denial of his § 2255
motion based on the district court's factual finding that Ramirez
did not request his attorney to file a direct criminal appeal.
Although Ramirez and his attorney, Daniel Hurley, presented
conflicting evidence, the factfinder's choice between these two
conflicting accounts cannot be clearly erroneous. See Anderson
v. City of Bessemer City,
470 U.S. 564, 573-74 (1985).
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No.
-2-
AFFIRMED.