Case ID: f-appx_697/html/0922-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gregg INOSHITA, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-15931
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted September 26, 2017 
    
    Filed September 29, 2017
    Darren Ching, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ—Office of the US Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Peter C. Wolff, Jr., Federal Public Defender, FPDHI—Federal Public Defender’s Office (Honolulu), Honolulu, HI, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2),
    
   MEMORANDUM

Gregg Inoshita appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we dismiss.

Inoshita challenges his career offender sentence, contending that his prior convictions for bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) are not “crime[s] of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a) (2015). The government argues that this appeal is barred by a valid appeal waiver. We review de novo whether a defendant has waived his right to appeal. See United States v. Harris, 628 F.3d 1203, 1205 (9th Cir. 2011). The terms of the appeal waiver in Inoshi-ta’s plea agreement unambiguously encompass the claims raised in this appeal. See id. at 1205-06. We reject as meritless Ino-shita’s arguments that his waiver is unenforceable. Accordingly, we dismiss pursuant to the valid waiver. See id. at 1207.

DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.