FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 24 2011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. 10-35367
Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. Nos. 3:09-cv-00020-RRB
3:04-cr-00070-RRB
v.
AMEEN ABDUL-JILLIL, MEMORANDUM *
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Alaska
Ralph R. Beistline, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 8, 2011 **
Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Federal prisoner Ameen Abdul-Jillil appeals from the district court’s
dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. §2255 habeas motion. 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).
Abdul-Jillil contends that his reliance on counsel’s misleading advice
regarding the potential sentence rendered his guilty pleas invalid. Irrespective of
counsel’s advice, Abdul-Jillil was adequately informed, by both the plea agreement
and the judge, that he might be sentenced to more than 135 months. Additionally,
Abdul-Jillil orally confirmed to the court that he understood the terms and
maximum sentence stated in the plea agreement before he entered his guilty pleas.
Accordingly, Abdul-Jillil has failed to demonstrate that he was prejudiced by
counsel’s performance. See Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 57-59 (1985) (applying
Strickland two-part test to guilty pleas); see also Womack v. Del Papa, 497 F.3d
998, 1003-04 (9th Cir. 2007).
Abdul-Jillil’s motion to file late excerpts of record and for relief from
default is granted.
AFFIRMED.
2 10-35367