NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAY 30 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 16-35855
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. Nos. 2:16-cv-00161-JLQ
2:10-cr-0025-JLQ
v.
WILLIAM BACON, MEMORANDUM *
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Justin L. Quackenbush, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 24, 2017**
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON,
Circuit Judges.
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
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
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.
2 16-35855