Clarence Adolphus v. United States ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                            NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       AUG 22 2019
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    CLARENCE RUDOLPH ADOLPHUS,                      No.    17-56694
    AKA Seal A,
    D.C. Nos.    2:16-cv-08800-CAS
    Petitioner-Appellant,                        2:04-cr-00402-CAS-1
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Respondent-Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Central District of California
    Christina A. Snyder, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted August 19, 2019**
    Before:      SCHROEDER, PAEZ, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    Clarence Rudolph Adolphus appeals 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. Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Riedl, 
    496 F.3d 1003
    , 1005 (9th
    Cir. 2007), we affirm.
    *
    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).
    Adolphus’s petition for a writ of error coram nobis raises several contentions
    of error in connection with his 2007 guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to
    distribute controlled substances and conspiracy to launder money. But Adolphus is
    still in custody in connection with that conviction. See United States v. Monreal,
    
    301 F.3d 1127
    , 1132 (9th Cir. 2002) (petitioner is in custody if he has not yet
    completed his term of supervised release). “A person in custody may seek relief
    pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.” Matus-Leva v. United States, 
    287 F.3d 758
    , 761
    (9th Cir. 2002). Therefore, the district court correctly determined that Adolphus
    cannot avail himself of coram nobis relief because he cannot show that a more
    usual remedy is unavailable to attack his conviction. See 
    id. at 760-61.
    Adolphus’s motion to file a corrected opening brief and excerpts of record is
    granted. The clerk will strike the brief at Docket Entry No. 19 and file the brief
    and excerpts of record at Docket Entry No. 30.
    AFFIRMED.
    2                                     17-56694
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-56694

Filed Date: 8/22/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/22/2019