Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Sandoval v. US, No. 07-4005

By FindLaw Staff on July 31, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

District court order denying petitioner's motion to vacate his conviction on grounds that the government violated his rights under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations is affirmed where the court properly concluded that petitioner's claim was procedurally barred as petitioner raised the argument for the first time and claims cannot be raised for the first time in a motion to vacate if they could have been raised at trial or on direct appeal, and petitioner also failed to show he suffered prejudiced by the denial. Plaintiff's certificate of appealability cannot be expanded to include a claim that his trial counsel was ineffective as plaintiff cannot show that reasonable jurists could debate whether his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by eliciting the testimony in question.   

Read Sandoval v. US, No. 07-4005

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois..
Argued: April 17, 2009
Decided: July 31, 2009

Before FLAUM, EVANS, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge.

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard