United States v. Timothy Carlson ( 2018 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 21 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-35157
Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00072-JLQ
v.
MEMORANDUM*
TIMOTHY JOSEPH CARLSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Washington
Justin L. Quackenbush, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 17, 2018**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Timothy Joseph Carlson appeals pro se from the district court’s order
denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. We have jurisdiction under 28
U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
This court reviews de novo the district court’s denial of a coram nobis
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
petition. See Matus-Leva v. United States, 287 F.3d 758, 760 (9th Cir. 2002). The
district court correctly denied Carlson’s petition. Carlson is still in custody and,
therefore, cannot show that a more usual remedy is unavailable to attack his
conviction. See id. at 761 (“A person in custody may seek relief pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 2255. Because the more usual remedy of a habeas petition is available,
the writ of error coram nobis is not.” (footnote omitted)).
AFFIRMED.
2 18-35157