
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Monder KHOURY, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-16393.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted July 12, 2011.
    
    Filed July 15, 2011.
    Jason Hitt, USSAC-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Victor Stephen Haltom, Law Office of Victor S. Haltom, Sacramento, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Federal prisoner Monder Khoury appeals from the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 habeas motion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

Khoury contends that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to inform him of the terms of a plea bargain proposed by the government. The testimony and evidence presented at the evidentiary hearing support the conclusion that counsel conveyed the terms of the plea offer to Khoury. Accordingly, the district court did not err in concluding that Khoury failed to establish that counsel’s performance was deficient under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).

Because we determine that trial counsel’s performance was not deficient, we do not reach Strickland’s prejudice prong. See e.g., Butcher v. Marquez, 758 F.2d 373, 377 (9th Cir.1985).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
     