Neko Kimon Defterios v. United States of America

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
NEKO KIMON DEFTERIOS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 08-55098
D.C. Nos. CV-07-00914-JVS
CR-01-00127-JVS
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
James V. Selna, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Neko Kimon Defterios appeals from the district court’s order denying his
28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and
we affirm.
FILED
APR 16 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-55098 2
Defterios contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel
because his counsel in a previous matter failed to pursue a global resolution of that
case and the instant case. The record reflects that during the relevant period, the
instant case was only in the investigatory stage. The Sixth Amendment right to
counsel “does not attach until a prosecution is commenced.” United States v.
Charley, 396 F.3d 1074, 1082 (9th Cir. 2005) (quoting McNeil v. Wisconsin, 501
U.S. 171, 175 (1991)). Thus, Defterios’ claim of ineffective assistance of counsel
fails. See United States v. Zazzara, 626 F.2d 135, 138 (9th Cir. 1980), abrogated
on other grounds as recognized in United States v. Pace, 833 F.2d 1307, 1311-12
(1987).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --