Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Armando MINERO-REGALADO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-06-18
Citations: 384 F. App'x 651
Docket Number: No. 07-56425
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Armando MINERO-REGALADO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. • FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 384
Pages: 651–652

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Armando MINERO-REGALADO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 07-56425.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 25, 2010.
Filed June 18, 2010.
Carlos Arguello, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Zandra L. Lopez, Esquire, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Armando Minero-Regalado, pro se.
Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. • FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Federal prisoner Armando Minero-Re- galado appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
Minero-Regalado contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. This contention is foreclosed because the record reflects that the district court did not err in concluding that his motion is barred by a valid waiver of the right to collaterally attack his conviction and sentence. See Washington v. Lampert, 422 F.3d 864, 869 (9th Cir.2005); see also White v. Klitzkie, 281 F.3d 920, 922 (9th Cir.2002) (this court may affirm the district court on any ground supported by the record even if that issue was not included in the certificate of appealability).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.