Gant v. U.S.

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant's habeas petition asserting that his attorney was ineffective for failing to challenge or appeal defendant's 180-month sentence on ground that counsel failed to challenge defendant's designation as Armed Career Criminal (ACC) where defendant claimed that his three prior convictions did not count toward his ACC status because his civil rights had been restored as to all three convictions. Dist. Ct. could properly conclude that defendant produced inauthentic letter to establish his alleged restoration of his civil rights status as to said convictions. Moreover, Ct. rejected defendant's claim that he had actually instructed counsel to file direct appeal of his sentence.