Sanborn

United States v. Sanborn

Good Law
175 F. App'x 156
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 11, 2006No. 05-10018California201 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Elmer Edward Sanborn appeals pro se from the district court’s denial of his petition for writ of error coram nobis challenging his 1995 conviction for disorderly conduct in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 2.34 (a)(4). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Reviewing de novo, see Estate of McKinney v. United States, 71 F.3d 779, 781 (9th Cir.1995), we affirm.

The writ of error coram nobis provides a remedy to attack a conviction when the petitioner has served his sentence, is no longer in custody, and is suffering from the “lingering collateral consequences of an unconstitutional or unlawful conviction based on errors of fact and egregious legal errors.” See id. (internal quotation marks omitted). In order to qualify for coram nobis relief, a petitioner must meet four requirements, one of which is to demonstrate that valid reasons exist for not attacking the conviction earlier. See id. Because Sanborn has not shown a valid reason for failing to attack his conviction earlier, we affirm the district court’s denial.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th…

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.