Opinion ID: 4513537
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Failure to File an Appeal

Text: If Ms. Strickland heard Mr. Orozco’s request for an appeal, it would be professionally unreasonable for her not to file a notice of appeal. See Garza, 139 S. Ct. at 746; Flores-Ortega, 528 U.S. at 477. The district court, however, made 18 a factual finding that Mr. Orozco did not adequately communicate a request for an appeal. That finding is reviewable only for clear error, see Orange, 447 F.3d at 796, and “[a] district court’s factual finding is clear error only if it is simply not plausible or permissible in light of the entire record on appeal,” United States v. Gould, 672 F.3d 930, 935 (10th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted). During the hearing, Mr. Orozco acknowledged that Ms. Strickland might not have heard him ask about an appeal, as she was taking off his interpreter headphones. Further, he testified that he made no effort to communicate with her after the sentencing. In light of this evidence, we cannot conclude the district court clearly erred in finding that Mr. Orozco did not adequately convey a request to appeal to Ms. Strickland. Because Mr. Orozco has failed to demonstrate that counsel’s performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness as required by Strickland, we affirm the denial of relief on this portion of this claim.