UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Victor IGBINEWEKA, Defendant-Appellant, 394 F. App'x 389

MEMORANDUM Under the terms of his plea agreement, Igbineweka waived the right to appeal his custodial sentence. See United States v. Martinez, 143 F.3d 1266, 1271 (9th Cir.1998). The government didn’t breach the agreement or waive his waiver, nor did the district court advise Igbineweka that he could appeal that part of his sentence. The agreement permitted him to appeal the amount of restitution, but he didn’t object to the “actual loss” calculation in the presentence report. The district court was therefore entitled to treat it as a finding of fact. Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(i)(3)(A).

We do not review the ineffective assistance claim on this direct appeal because the record is insufficient to evaluate it. See United States v. Jeronimo, 398 F.3d 1149, 1155-56 (9th Cir.2005). AFFIRMED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.