Unpublished Disposition, 904 F.2d 40 (9th Cir. 1986)

MEMORANDUM^** 

William H. Collier, Jr. appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence. We review de novo, United States v. Angelone, 894 F.2d 1129, 1130 (9th Cir. 1990), and affirm.

In December 1984, Collier pleaded guilty to armed robbery. He later moved to withdraw his plea claiming that he did not understand that by pleading guilty he waived his right to appeal. The district court denied the motion and this court affirmed in an unpublished opinion. United States v. Collier, No. 85-1041 (9th Cir. Oct. 9, 1986).

Collier then filed this motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 alleging that his sentence was invalid because his guilty plea was coerced and he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Both arguments were based on his counsel's failure to advise him that by pleading guilty he would lose the right to appeal. The district court denied the petition. This ruling is not directly challenged on appeal.

Even if Collier's appeal is construed as raising the district court's denial of the issues in his petition, his challenge fails. Collier's contention that his plea was not voluntary had already been considered and rejected by this court. See Cavanaugh v. Kincheloe, 877 F.2d 1443, 1446-47 (9th Cir. 1989) ("law of the case" doctrine). He also cannot show that he was prejudiced by his counsel's failure to advise him that he had no right of appeal because the trial court specifically advised him that he was waiving his right of appeal during the plea hearing. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984).

Collier raises two different issues on appeal. He contends that his sentence should be vacated because there was no factual basis for his guilty plea and his counsel was ineffective in allowing him to plead guilty to armed robbery when he claimed he did not use a gun. We do not review these arguments because Collier did not raise them in the district court and they are not purely legal, central to the case, or important to the public. Tatum v. Christensen, 786 F.2d 959, 964 (9th Cir. 1986); Yuckert v. Heckler, 774 F.2d 1365, 1367 (9th Cir. 1986).

AFFIRMED.