United States v. Holbs ( 1996 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-50713
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
IAN JAMES HOLBS,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. A-95-CV-382
- - - - - - - - - -
May 20, 1996
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ian James Holbs appeals the district court’s denial of his
motion to vacate, correct, or set aside his sentence under
28 U.S.C. § 2255. He argues that his counsel was ineffective in
that he failed to object to the trial court’s imposition of a
consecutive sentence for his escape convictions, and he
erroneously advised Holbs to dismiss his direct appeal of his
sentence. Because the relation between the 1990 U.S. Sentencing
Guideline provisions §§ 3C1.1, 3D1.2, and 5G1.3 has not been
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-50713
- 2 -
directly addressed by this court, Holbs’ counsel was not
ineffective for failing to raise this issue at sentencing. See
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 689-94 (1984). Further,
Holbs has not shown that his claim would have had a reasonable
probability of success on appeal. See Duhamel v. Collins, 995
F.2d 962, 967 (5th Cir. 1992)(citation omitted).
AFFIRMED.