Andrews v. Davis, No. 09-99012 (12-16-19)(en banc: Opinion by Murguia; dissent by N. Smith). The 9th finds IAC in sentencing for failure to present mitigating circumstances. Specifically, social history and trauma of the defendant. This failure was unreasonable and prejudicial. It is even so under AEDPA. The dissenters argue that AEDPA requires deference.

The decision is here:

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/12/16/09-99012.pdf

2. US v. Wang, No. 17-10275 (12-16-19)(M. Smith w/Graber & Watford). Cross references need to be followed. The 9th vacated sentences and remanded when the court, on sentencing in a fraud and mail conviction, and conspiracy, used the fraud guideline, 2B1.1, rather than the visa fraud guideline, 2L2.1, as required by the cross reference. The error was plain and prejudicial.

Congrats to Deputy Fed Defender Gus Kim (Los Angeles).

The decision is here:

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/12/16/17-10275.pdf