Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. GARCIA-GONZALEZ, 2:14-cr-0131-01 KJM. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20151104669 Visitors: 10
Filed: Nov. 02, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 02, 2015
Summary: ORDER KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . Movant is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255. On May 26, 2015, respondent filed a motion to dismiss and, alternatively, an answer to the 2255 motion. ECF No. 26. By order filed June 10, 2015, movant was granted fourteen days to file and serve a response to respondent's motion to dismiss/answer. ECF No. 30. The fourteen day period has passed and movant has
More

ORDER

Movant is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. On May 26, 2015, respondent filed a motion to dismiss and, alternatively, an answer to the § 2255 motion. ECF No. 26. By order filed June 10, 2015, movant was granted fourteen days to file and serve a response to respondent's motion to dismiss/answer. ECF No. 30. The fourteen day period has passed and movant has not filed a response to the motion to dismiss/answer or responded in any way to the court's June 10, 2015 order.

Respondent seeks dismissal of the § 2255 motion on several grounds, including that movant waived his right to collaterally attack his conviction. See ECF No. 26 at 5-6. A criminal defendant may waive the right to bring a collateral attack on a conviction, and the waiver is enforceable as long as it is "knowing and voluntary." United States v. Abarca, 985 F.2d 1012, 1014 (9th Cir. 1993). The record reflects that movant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to bring a § 2255 motion. See ECF No. 26-4 at 17; ECF No. 26-5 at 9. Accordingly, the § 2255 motion must be dismissed.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Respondent's May 26, 2015 motion to dismiss, ECF No. 26, is granted;

2. Movant's March 23, 2015 § 2255 motion is dismissed; and

3. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability required by 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c).

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer