USA V. ABEL FABIAN-BALTAZAR, No. 15-16115 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on July 30, 2019.
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 14 2017 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, No. 15-16115 D.C. Nos. 1:14-cv-00984-AWI 1:13-cr-00032-AWI- v. BAM-1 ABEL HERIBERTO FABIANBALTAZAR, AKA Abel Heriberto Fabia Baltazar, MEMORANDUM* Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Anthony W. Ishii, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted December 4, 2017 San Francisco, California Before: KOZINSKI and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and KEELEY,** District Judge. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Irene M. Keeley, United States District Judge for the Northern District of West Virginia, sitting by designation. page 2 The district court didn’t err by enforcing Fabian-Baltazar’s express waiver of his right to bring a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition. See United States v. Abarca, 985 F.2d 1012, 1014 (9th Cir. 1993). “[A] plea agreement that waives the right to file a federal habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is unenforceable with respect to an IAC claim that challenges the voluntariness of the waiver.” Washington v. Lampert, 422 F.3d 864, 871 (9th Cir. 2005). But, even construed liberally, FabianBaltazar’s pro se habeas petition didn’t challenge the voluntariness of his collateral appeals waiver. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 (1976). AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
