Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00619/USCOURTS-casd-3_17-cv-00619-0/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,

CASE NO. 16cr638-LAB-1 and

17cv619-LAB

ORDER DENYING MOTION UNDER 28

U.S.C. § 2255

vs.

SERGIO BAUTISTA MANZO,

Defendant.

Defendant Sergio Bautista Manzo pled guilty to one count of importation of marijuana

and was sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment followed by three years’ supervised release. 

Under his plea agreement, he waived any right to appeal and collateral attack his conviction,

except for a collateral attack based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. (Docket

no. 17 at 11:12–16.) 

Bautista Manzo did not file an appeal, but he he filed a motion to vacate his

conviction, under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He is not challenging the voluntariness of his plea, or

his counsel’s effectiveness in advising him or allowing him to plead guilty. Instead, he argues

that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated when he was questioned at the border. He

argues that his confession was involuntary and thus inadmissible, and that his counsel was

ineffective for failing to make that argument. He also contends his counsel should have

pointed out inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case.

- 1 - 16cv638 and 17cv619

Case 3:17-cv-00619-LAB Document 2 Filed 04/04/17 PageID.<pageID> 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

Bautista Manzo’s guilty plea waived all those alleged defects. United States v. Davis,

452 F.2d 577, 578 (9 Cir. 1971) (“[A] plea of guilty admits all averments of fact in the

th

indictment, all defects not jurisdictional are cured, all defenses are waived and the

prosecution is relieved from the duty of proving any facts.”). Furthermore, his counsel was

not ineffective for failing to challenge admissibility of his confession, because there was no

trial and therefore no occasion to challenge admissibility.

The motion is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: April 3, 2017

HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS

United States District Judge

- 2 - 16cv638 and 17cv619

Case 3:17-cv-00619-LAB Document 2 Filed 04/04/17 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2