United States v. James Zimmerman

Good Law
498 F. App'x 681
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 16, 201211-17471California347 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

James Brett Zimmerman appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for habeas corpus. We review the district court’s denial of a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion de novo, United States v. Gamba, 541 F.3d 895, 898 (9th Cir.2008), and now affirm.

Zimmerman, who was previously convicted of felony robbery and burglary, pleaded guilty to one count of bank robbery and was sentenced to a prison term. During the plea negotiations, the government promised not to pursue a federal three strikes charge in exchange for Zimmerman’s guilty plea. See 18 U.S.C. § 3559 (c)(1)(A) (defendants convicted of a serious violent felony who have previously been convicted of at least two additional serious violent felonies are subject to life imprisonment). Zimmerman now claims that the government’s promise was illusory because he did not use or threaten to use a firearm or dangerous weapon during his robberies, and therefore qualifies for a statutory exception to the three strikes rule. See id. § 3559(c)(3)(A).

Zimmerman is mistaken. Because he had more than two prior serious violent felony convictions, the government could have charged him under the three strikes statute. See id. §…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.