Source: http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20090512_0007434.ECA.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2016-12-06 20:28:02
Document Index: 312628719

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2255', '§ 843', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2255']

| Reynaga v. United States
Reynaga v. United States
FRANCISCO REYNAGA, PETITIONER,v.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, RESPONDENT.
ORDER ON PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR RELIEF UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255 AND REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL
Pursuant to a plea agreement, on June 4, 2007, Petitioner pled guilty to two counts of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b), using a communication facility in the commission of a drug trafficking offense. Criminal Docket Doc. Nos. 64, 65, 75. As part of the plea agreement, Petitioner agreed to waive his right to appeal, his right to file a motion under § 2255, and his right to request further downward departures, and also agreed to a minimum sentence of 70 months. See id. at Doc. No. 64 at ¶¶ 2(c), (g). Petitioner was sentenced to 70 months total confinement on June 4, 2007, and Judgment and commitment were entered on June 15, 2007. See id. at Doc. Nos. 75, 78. Petitioner filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion on October 10, 2007. See id. at Doc. No. 96.
Here, Petitioner seeks an additional downward departure based on his deportation status as an alien. Petitioner also states that aliens are deprived of certain opportunities and privileges that are afforded to citizens, such as a reduction in sentence for participation in a drug program and availability of a half way house. Relief is not warranted.
First, Petitioner signed a plea agreement in which he expressly agreed that his minimum sentence would be 70 months, that he would not seek further downward departures, and that he would not file a § 2255 motion. See Court's Docket Doc. No. 64 at ¶¶ 2(c), (g). Plea agreements will be enforced as long as they are unambiguous and voluntarily made. See United States v. Jeronimo, 398 F.3d 1149, 1153-54 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. Abarca, 985 F.2d 1012, 1014 (9th Cir. 1992). Petition does not address the plea agreement or argue that the agreement was involuntary, and the language of the plea agreement is clear. See Court's Docket Doc. No. 64 at ¶¶ 2(c), (g). The plea agreement precludes the relief that he seeks. See Jeronimo, 398 F.3d at 1153-54; Abarca, 985 F.2d at 1014. Second, a "court generally may not correct or modify a prison sentence once it has been imposed" unless permitted by statute or Rule of Criminal Procedure 35. United States v. Penna, 319 F.3d 509, 511 (9th Cir. 2003). Petitioner has not shown either that the Court has the ability to grant a further downward departure or alleged sufficient facts to show that an additional downward departure would be applicable. See Penna, 319 F.3d at 511; Howard, 381 F.3d at 877; Hearst, 638 F.2d at 1194. Third, there is no indication that Petitioner appealed his sentence and a "petitioner may not collaterally attack a sentence under § 2255 if he did not challenge it at sentencing or on a direct appeal." Johnson v. United States, 362 F.3d 636, 638 (9th Cir. 2004). Fourth, exclusion from a prison's various drug treatment programs or community confinement programs due to one's status as deportable alien does not violate the Constitution. See McLean v. Crabtree, 173 F.3d 1176, 1186 (9th Cir. 1999); Rodriguez-Carrillo v. United States, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22998 (D. Idaho 2009); United States v. Franco-Saenz, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8384 (D. Ariz. 2007); Bazua-Aviles v. Andrews, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60644 (E.D. Cal. 2006). Simply put, relief under § 2255 is not appropriate.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition is DENIED, and the Clerk shall CLOSE this case.