Matthew Bridges v. United States

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 23-3148

___________________________

Matthew Shawn Victor Bridges

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant

v.

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids

____________

Submitted: September 10, 2024 Filed: September 13, 2024 [Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Matthew Bridges appeals the district court’s1 order denying his 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255 motion after an evidentiary hearing. The district court granted a certificate of

1 The Honorable C.J. Williams, then United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa, now Chief Judge.

appealability on Bridges’s claim that his counsel was ineffective for failing to file a direct appeal as requested. After de novo review of the ineffective-assistance claim, according deference to the district court’s credibility findings, we conclude that the court did not clearly err in finding that Bridges did not ask his attorney to file an appeal. See Walking Eagle v. United States, 742 F.3d 1079, 1082 (8th Cir. 2014). We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to continue the hearing to allow Bridges’s additional proposed witnesses to testify. See Souder v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 939 F.2d 647, 651 (8th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________