United States v. Mondor Khoury

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 15 2011 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 08-16393 Plaintiff - Appellee, D.C. Nos. 2:03-cv-01225-DLJ 2:99-cr-00093-DLJ v. MONDER KHOURY, MEMORANDUM * Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California D. Lowell Jensen, District Judge, Presiding Submitted July 12, 2011 ** Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. Federal prisoner Monder Khoury appeals from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 habeas motion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm. Khoury contends that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to inform * 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). him of the terms of a plea bargain proposed by the government. The testimony and evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing support the conclusion that counsel conveyed the terms of the plea offer to Khoury. Accordingly, the district court did not err in concluding that Khoury failed to establish that counsel’s performance was deficient under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88 (1984). Because we determine that trial counsel’s performance was not deficient, we do not reach Strickland’s prejudice prong. See e.g., Butcher v. Marquez, 758 F.2d 373, 377 (9th Cir. 1985). AFFIRMED. 2 08-16393