Lankford v. Administrator of Prisons

MEMORANDUM ^*

We affirm for the reasons set forth in the well-reasoned district court order. In addition, defense counsel’s decision not to pursue a coercion defense “was a strategic ehoice[ ] made after thorough investigation of law and facts relevant to plausible options ... [,]” rendering it “virtually unchallengeable.” See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 691, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

AFFIRMED.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.