Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01602/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-01602-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence

---

1

12cr3547-CAB; 18cv1602-CAB

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

DIEGO RIVERA VALENCIA,

Defendant.

Case No.: 12cr3547-CAB; 18cv1602-

CAB

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

VACATE, SET ASIDE OR 

CORRECT SENTENCE PURSUANT 

TO 28 U.S.C. SECTION 2255

On April 27, 2018, Petitioner Diego Rivera Valencia filed a motion under 28 

U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct a sentence. [Doc. No. 37.] On August 27, 

2018, Respondent filed a response. [Doc. No. 39.] Petitioner has not filed a reply. For 

the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED.

First, Petitioner’s motion is time-barred. To be timely, an initial §2255 motion 

must be filed within one year after the conviction became final. 28 U.S.C. §2255(f)(1). 

Here, the Court entered final judgment on November 20, 2012. [Doc. No. 28.] 

Defendant did not file his motion until April 27, 2018, six years after the conviction 

became final. Moreover, while the one-year statute of limitations is subject to equitable 

tolling “if extraordinary circumstances beyond a prisoner’s control make it impossible to 

file a petition on time,” Calderon v. United States Dist. Court, 128 F.3d 1283, 1288 (9th 

Cir. 1997)(citations omitted), overruled on other grounds by Calderon v. United States 

Case 3:18-cv-01602-CAB Document 2 Filed 10/01/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

12cr3547-CAB; 18cv1602-CAB

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Dist. Court, 163 F.3d 530 (9th Cir. 1998)(en banc), Petitioner has not demonstrated that 

such extraordinary circumstances exist. 

In addition, Defendant signed a written plea agreement in which he affirmatively 

gave up any right to appeal or collaterally attack his conviction. [Doc. No. 15 at 12.] 

Defendant is bound by such a waiver if it is knowing and voluntary. United States v. 

Navarro-Botello, 912 F. 2d 318, 321 (9th Cir. 1990). Here Petitioner has made no 

showing that it was not knowing and voluntary. Therefore, the waiver is enforceable. 

Finally, the issues Plaintiff raises – such as statements made by the prosecutor at 

his arraignment -- are issues that could have been raised on direct appeal and, therefore, 

are procedurally defaulted. Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614, 621 (1998). There 

has been no showing to make an exception to this rule. See id at 622 (to obtain review, a 

petitioner must show that (1) he had good cause for not raising the claim earlier and 

would suffer “actual prejudice” if it were not now reviewed, or (2) he is actually 

innocent).

Accordingly, the motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. §2255 is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 1, 2018

Case 3:18-cv-01602-CAB Document 2 Filed 10/01/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2