USA v. Calvin Morri, No. 09-16130 (9th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED OCT 25 2010 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 09-16130 D.C. Nos. 2:08-cv-00462-JAT 2:04-cr-01088-JAT v. CALVIN FRANK MORRIS, MEMORANDUM * Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona James A. Teilborg, District Judge, Presiding Submitted October 19, 2010 Before: ** O SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges. Federal prisoner Calvin Frank Morris appeals from the district court s judgment denying his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). The district court properly denied Morris claim of ineffective assistance of counsel because Morris has not established deficient performance by his trial counsel s decisions not to object to the government s alleged amendment of the indictment, or to the Pinkerton instruction. See Rupe v. Wood, 93 F.3d 1434, 1445 (9th Cir. 1996) (failure to take a futile action is not deficient performance). Furthermore, Morris has not established a reasonable probability that a separate jury trial on the issue of drug quantity or a request for a minor role adjustment under the Sentencing Guidelines would have produced a different result given the extensive evidence against him. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694 (1984). AFFIRMED. 2 09-16130
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
