United States of America v. Young Ho Chang

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without**
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
sko/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
YOUNG HO CHANG,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 07-35263
D.C. Nos. CV-06-05646-FDB
CR-05-05246-FDB
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Franklin D. Burgess, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted November 17, 2009**
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Washington state prisoner Young Ho Chang appeals from the district court’s
judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We have jurisdiction pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
FILED
DEC 14 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

sko/Research 07-35263 2
Chang contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when his
trial attorney failed to inform him that he faced automatic deportation, based on the
amount of loss and restitution involved in his conviction. Even assuming that
counsel’s advice constituted deficient performance, Chang has failed to show that
there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, he
would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial. Hill v.
Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985). Nor has Chang shown a reasonable probability
that any attempted renegotiation of the plea agreement would have been successful.
Cf. United States v. Kwan, 407 F.3d 1005, 1017-18 (9th Cir. 2005).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --