Barber v. United States

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-6076
DONALD LOUIS BARBER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg,
District Judge. (CR-96-21, CA-02-7)
Submitted: March 5, 2003 Decided: April 2, 2003
Before WILLIAMS, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Donald Louis Barber, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik,
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Donald Louis Barber appeals the district court’s order denying
his petition for a writ of audita querela. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Although the district court
addressed Barber’s claims on the merits, we find that a writ of
audita querela was not available because Barber could have raised
his claims in a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). See United
States v. Torres, 282 F.3d 1241, 1245 (10th Cir. 2002). The fact
that Barber was unable to obtain relief under § 2255 does not alter
our conclusion. See United States v. Valdez-Pacheco, 237 F.3d
1077, 1080 (9th Cir. 2001) (“A prisoner may not circumvent valid
congressional limitations on collateral attacks by asserting that
those very limitations create a gap in the postconviction remedies
that must be filled by the common law writs.”); In re Jones, 226
F.3d 328, 333 (4th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, we affirm. We deny
Barber’s motion to stay and dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2