Rhodes

United States v. Rhodes

Good Law
35 F. App'x 637
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 24, 2002No. 00-15901; D.C. Nos. CR-84-00039-ECR CV-00-00158-ECRCalifornia301 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

David Thomas Rhodes appeals pro se the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of coram nobis, filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (a), challenging his 1985 convictions for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, interstate travel in aid of racketeering, unlawful use of a communication facility, and possession of unregistered firearms. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s denial of a petition for a writ of coram nobis, United States v. Walgren, 885 F.2d 1417, 1420 (9th Cir.1989), and we affirm.

The district court properly denied Rhodes’ petition because Rhodes cannot show that “valid reasons exist for not attacking the conviction earlier.” Hirabayashi v. United States, 828 F.2d 591, 604 (9th Cir.1987). Indeed, Rhodes has raised, unsuccessfully, the issue set forth in his petition in several prior proceedings, including motions filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . See e.g., United States v. Rhodes, No. 86-2961, 1988 WL 82800 (9th Cir. Feb.17, 1989). The writ of coram nobis is therefore not available to him. See United States v. Valdez-Pacheco, 237 F.3d 1077, 1079 (9th Cir.2001) (per…

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.