Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-02354/USCOURTS-casd-3_13-cv-02354-0/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

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/Respondent, 

v.

WENDY ESTRADA-RUBIO, 

Defendant/Petitioner.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) 

)

Civil No. 13-CV-2354-JLS

Criminal No. 12-CR-2050-JLS

ORDER DISMISSING

PETITIONER’S MOTION

UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255 

and DENYING CERTIFICATE OF

APPEALABILITY 

(ECF No. 37)

Currently pending before the Court is Petitioner’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or

Correct Sentence by a Person in Federal Custody brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. 

The Court has reviewed the record in this case which establishes that Petitioner waived

both her right to appeal and to collaterally attack her conviction and sentence. (Plea

Agreement, ECF No. 15 at 10-11.) Petitioner’s motion raises no challenge to the validity

of this waiver,1

 therefore this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider any collateral challenge

to her conviction and sentence. See Washington v. Lampert, 422 F.3d 864, 869 (9th Cir.

2005) (recognizing that sentencing agreement’s valid waiver of the right to file a federal

1

 The sole basis for relief presented in Petitioner’s motion is “lack of attorney’s support” during post-plea sentence mitigation efforts with the Government. 

12cv2354; 12cr2050

Case 3:13-cv-02354-JLS Document 2 Filed 08/23/16 Page 1 of 2
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

habeas petition deprives district court of jurisdiction to hear case). 

 Accordingly, Petitioner’s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence by a

Person in Federal Custody pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DISMISSED. Additionally,

the Court DENIES Petitioner a certificate of appealability, as Petitioner has not made a

substantial showing that she has been denied a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. §

2253(c) (providing that a certificate shall issue “only if the applicant has made a

substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right”).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 23, 2016

Honorable Janis L. Sammartino

United States District Judge

2 12cv2354; 12cr2050

Case 3:13-cv-02354-JLS Document 2 Filed 08/23/16 Page 2 of 2