FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 05 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 08-55885
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. Nos. 2:07-cv-06246-RMT
2:01-cr-00564-RMT
v.
ARMANDO GARCIA RICO, MEMORANDUM *
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Robert M. Takasugi, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 14, 2010 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner Armando Garcia Rico appeals from the district court’s
denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion for relief. We have jurisdiction pursuant to
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).
Rico contends that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to appeal the
district court’s sentence following a limited remand under United States v.
Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc). Counsel here did not have a
constitutionally imposed duty to consult with Rico about an appeal and therefore
did not provide ineffective assistance by not filing an appeal. See Roe v.
Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. 470, 480 (2000).
Rico’s motion to supplement the record is denied. See Fed. R. App.
P. 10(e); Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896, 900 n.4 (9th Cir. 2001).
AFFIRMED.
2 08-55885