Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Abel Heriberto FABIAN-BALTAZAR, AKA Abel Heriberto Fabia Baltazar, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-12-14
Citations: 707 F. App'x 477
Docket Number: No. 15-16115
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Abel Heriberto FABIAN-BALTAZAR, AKA Abel Heriberto Fabia Baltazar, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: KOZINSKI and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and KEELEY, District Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 707
Pages: 477–478

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Abel Heriberto FABIAN-BALTAZAR, AKA Abel Heriberto Fabia Baltazar, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-16115
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted December 4, 2017 San Francisco, California
Filed December 14, 2017
Melanie Leigh Alsworth, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ-USAO, Fresno, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Peggy Sasso, Esquire, FPDCA — Federal Public Defender’s Office (Fresno), Fresno, CA, for Defendant-Appellant
Before: KOZINSKI and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and KEELEY, District Judge.
The Honorable Irene M. Keeley, United States District Judge for the Northern District of West Virginia, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The district court didn't err by enforcing Fabian-Baltazar's express waiver of his right to bring a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition. See United States v. Abarca, 985 F.2d 1012, 1014 (9th Cir. 1993). "(A] plea agreement that waives the right to file a federal habeas petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is unenforceable with respect to an IAC claim that challenges the voluntariness of the waiver." Washington v. Lampert, 422 F.3d 864, 871 (9th Cir. 2005). But, even construed liberally, Fabian-Baltazar's pro se habeas petition didn't challenge the voluntariness of his collateral appeals waiver. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97 S.Ct 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,