United States v. James Edward Evanson

Good Law
76 F.3d 389·1996 WL 19258·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 7390
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 17, 199695-30002California593 words

Opinion

Opinion

76 F.3d 389 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Edward EVANSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-30002. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Jan. 9, 1996. * Decided Jan. 17, 1996. Before: SNEED, HALL, and BRUNETTI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 James Edward Evanson, a former federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and his Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment. We review for abuse of discretion both the denial of a section 2255 motion as successive, Campbell v. Blodgett, 997 F.2d 512, 516 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 1337 (1994), and the denial of a Rule 59(e) motion, Swimmer v. IRS, 811 F.2d 1343, 1345 (9th Cir.1987). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. 1 3 The district court properly denied Evanson's third section 2255 motion as successive because Evanson raises…

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.