Sanders

United States v. Sanders

Good Law
276 F. App'x 603
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 1, 2008No. 07-15437California307 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

James H. Sanders, a former federal prisoner, appeals from the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. Sanders challenges his 1996 conviction for mail fraud. We previously affirmed his conviction. See United, States v. Sanders, No. 97-10056, 1999 WL 439415 , at *2 (9th Cir. June 22, 1999) (unpublished disposition).

His principal contention is that the district court erred by changing the date on the copy of the superseding indictment to the date his trial ended. Both the original superseding indictment and the indictment with the date changed included charges that were dismissed during his trial.

To warrant coram nobis relief, the petitioner must satisfy four requirements, including a showing that fundamental error occurred in the proceedings and that there are valid reasons why the petitioner did not act to attack the conviction earlier. See Hirabayashi v. United States, 828 F.2d 591, 604 (9th Cir.1987). Sanders cannot show any fundamental error arising out of the indictment because all participants in the proceedings, including the defendant, counsel, judge, and jury, understood the charges that the defendant faced when the case…

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.