
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Michael David CHRISTAKIS, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 02-55749.
    D.C. Nos. CV-97-01212-ER; CR-90-00498-ER-02.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Feb. 4, 2004.
    
    Decided Feb. 12, 2004.
    
      Bruce Riordan, Ronald L. Cheng, USLA-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Los Angeles, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Michael David Christakis, pro se, Taft, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before KOZINSKI, O’SCANNLAIN and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See 
        Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

The district court did not err in denying defendant’s motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because defendant has not demonstrated that his counsel’s conflict of interest adversely affected his representation. Mannhalt v. Reed, 847 F.2d 576, 579 (9th Cir.1988) (citing Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335, 350, 100 S.Ct. 1708, 64 L.Ed.2d 333 (1980)).

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.
     