Opinion
No. 16-35855
05-30-2017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. WILLIAM BACON, Defendant-Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. Nos. 2:16-cv-00161-JLQ 2:10-cr-0025-JLQ MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington
Justin L. Quackenbush, District Judge, Presiding Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
William Bacon appeals from the district court's order denying his motion to vacate his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.
As Bacon concedes, all of his arguments on the three certified issues in this appeal are foreclosed. See Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886, 895 (2017) (holding that "the advisory Sentencing Guidelines are not subject to a vagueness challenge under the Due Process Clause and that [U.S.S.G.] § 4B1.2(a)'s residual clause is not void for vagueness").
Bacon's motion to expand the certificate of appealability is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 22-1(e); Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999).
AFFIRMED.