United States v. Victor E. Quinn

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 99-4079

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the

v. * Northern District of Iowa.

*

Victor Essil Quinn, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 12, 2000 Filed: September 25, 2000

___________

Before McMILLIAN and BOWMAN, Circuit Judges, and BOGUE,1 District Judge.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Victor Essil Quinn appeals from the decision of the District Court2 denying his Motion to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Quinn alleges ineffective assistance of trial counsel based upon counsel's failure to object or

1 The Honorable Andrew W. Bogue, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota, sitting by designation.

2 The Honorable Michael J. Melloy, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.

draw attention to the government's failure to comply with 21 U.S.C. § 851 (notice of intent to seek enhanced punishment based upon prior drug convictions).

We review the District Court's order de novo. See Iron Wing v. United States, 34 F.3d 662, 664 (8th Cir. 1994) (reviewing ineffective assistance issue de novo and reviewing underlying predicate facts under the clearly erroneous standard). We conclude that the government complied with the notice requirements of § 851, and therefore defendant's ineffective assistance claim is without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.