Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Shaw

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided August 25, 2008No. 08-3078Published

1ConcurrenceJ. O’Brien, Circuit Judge

I concur, but write separately to express my belief that Shaw would not be entitled to an evidentiary hearing even if he had alleged in his district court filings that he specifically requested his counsel file a notice of appeal. First, Shaw cannot succeed on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), because none of the grounds on which he seeks to appeal survive his appeal waiver. Second, even if we found counsel’s performance to be deficient and presumed prejudice under Roe v. Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Roe v. Flores-OrtegaSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  3. United States v. PoindexterCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007
  4. United States v. CockerhamCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2001
  5. Francisco Gomez-Diaz v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2005

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API