United States of America v. Fred Robison

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).
AK/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FRED ROBISON,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-10068
D.C. No. 2:05-CR-00170-JCM
MEMORANDUM *
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 16, 2010**
Before: SCHROEDER, PREGERSON, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Fred Robison appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed following a
guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to
distribute a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. We have
FILED
MAR 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

AK/Research 09-10068 2
jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Robison contends that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to further
investigate whether he was eligible for safety-valve relief. The record in this case
is sufficiently developed for us to determine that Robison did not receive
ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Labrada-Bustamante, 428
F.3d 1252, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 2005). Specifically, the record reflects that counsel
investigated the validity of the prior conviction that made him ineligible for safety
valve consideration, and undertook a great deal of effort to attack the conviction in
state court. Because Robison fails to demonstrate that counsel’s performance was
deficient, his claim fails. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-90
(1984).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --