Gonzalez-Lozano v. USA

Filing 2

ORDER Denying Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 7/25/2017.(All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(lrf)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
RODRIGO GONZALEZ-LOZANO,

CASE NO. 16cv2852-LAB

9
Plaintiff,
10
11
12
13

vs.

ORDER DENYING MOTION UNDER 28
U.S.C. § 2255

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
Two years ago Rodrigo Gonzalez-Lozano pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute

14

methamphetamine. The guidelines suggested up to 210 months in prison; the Court

15

sentenced Lozano to 99 months. Lozano asks the Court to vacate his sentence because

16

he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The Court denies the motion for two

17

reasons.

18

First, it’s untimely. Lozano filed this motion more than a year after the Court

19

entered final judgment on April 13, 2015. 22 U.S.C. § 2255(f); see United States v.

20

Schwartz, 274 F.3d 1220, 1223 (9th Cir. 2001). Second, counsel wasn’t ineffective by

21

failing to argue that the government breached its promise of a 70-month sentence. The

22

plea agreement makes clear that sentencing is in the sole discretion of the judge.1 The

23

motion is DENIED.

24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: July 25, 2017

26
HONORABLE LARRY ALAN Burns
United States District Judge

27
28
1

For example, the agreement states that the sentencing “recommendation made by
the Government is not binding on the Court, and it is uncertain at this time what Defendant’s
sentence will be.” Dkt. 231.
-116cv2852