--- title: "Roe v. Flores-Ortega" citation: "528 U.S. 470 (2000)" authority_id: "AUTH-SCOTUS-FLORES-ORTEGA-528-US-470" authority_type: "case" jurisdiction: "federal_nationwide" precedential_status: "binding" official_url: "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-528/pdf/USREPORTS-528-470.pdf" url: "https://jason93.com/legal/federal-process/authorities/AUTH-SCOTUS-FLORES-ORTEGA-528-US-470/" legal_review: "2026-08-25" links_checked: "2026-10-15" links_available: 1 links_checked_count: 1 license: "CC BY 4.0" --- # Roe v. Flores-Ortega ## Holding or rule used Requested-appeal performance, duty to consult, and forfeited-appeal prejudice. ## Material limitation Use only for the bounded proposition in the linked § 2255 module. State-habeas holdings are not silently converted into direct § 2255 holdings; record, circuit, local, deadline, custody, waiver, and classification issues remain separate where identified. ## Official source and pinpoints 528 U.S. 470 (2000), 528 U.S. 477–86: ## Used in - [Section 2255 Cognizability, Default, Actual Innocence, and Ineffective Assistance](https://jason93.com/legal/federal-process/modules/60-post-conviction/2255-default-innocence-and-ineffective-assistance.md)