United States v. Clay Douglas Siemsen

107 F.3d 18, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 7292, 1997 WL 43189
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 27, 1997
Docket96-35902
StatusUnpublished

This text of 107 F.3d 18 (United States v. Clay Douglas Siemsen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Clay Douglas Siemsen, 107 F.3d 18, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 7292, 1997 WL 43189 (9th Cir. 1997).

Opinion

107 F.3d 18

NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Clay Douglas SIEMSEN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 96-35902.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 21, 1997.*
Decided Jan. 27, 1997.

Before: O'SCANNLAIN, LEAVY and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM**

Federal prisoner Clay Douglas Siemsen appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his 1990 guilty plea conviction for methamphetamine manufacture in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and affirm.

Siemsen's guilty plea waives his challenge to the computation of drugs for his sentence. See United States v. David H., 29 F.3d 489, 493 (9th Cir.1994); United States v. Kidder, 869 F.2d 1328, 1332-33 (9th Cir.1989). Siemsen's remaining claims of sentencing error were resolved against him by this Court in his direct criminal appeal. United States v. Siemsen, No. 90-30403 unpublished memorandum disposition (9th Cir. Jan. 22, 1992). Accordingly, Siemsen cannot use this section 2255 motion to reargue the matter. See United States v. Redd, 759 F.2d 699, 701 (9th Cir.1985) (per curiam).

Siemsen's contentions that his counsel was ineffective under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984), and that the government committed misconduct, are not supported by the record. Because Siemsen's claims are without merit, the district court did not abuse its discretion by failing to hold an evidentiary hearing. See Quintero v. United States, 33 F.3d 1133, 1135 (9th Cir.1994) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 9th Cir.R. 34-4

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir.R. 36-3

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
United States v. Lawrence J. Kidder
869 F.2d 1328 (Ninth Circuit, 1989)
United States v. David H., Juvenile
29 F.3d 489 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)
Manuel Contreras Quintero v. United States
33 F.3d 1133 (Ninth Circuit, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
107 F.3d 18, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 7292, 1997 WL 43189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-clay-douglas-siemsen-ca9-1997.