Monroe v. United States

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS June 13, 2007
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-41630
Summary Calendar
SCOTT SAMUEL MONROE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:04-CV-389
--------------------
Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Scott Samuel Monroe appeals the district court’s denial of his
petition for a writ of error coram nobis. Monroe sought coram
nobis relief from his 1988 guilty-plea conviction for tax evasion.
Monroe asserted in his petition that he discovered for the first
time in February 2004 that a critical element of the offense to
which he pleaded guilty was an intent to defeat or avoid taxes.
Monroe asserted that his conviction was a miscarriage of justice
because the district court failed to ascertain whether he had such
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
No. 05-41630
-2-
intent and because he did not, in fact, have such intent. He
asserted that a writ of coram nobis was the appropriate remedy for
his claim because he was not aware of the claim until his sentence
was completely served and because he continued to suffer civil
disabilities flowing from his felony conviction.
On appeal, Monroe challenges the district court’s
determination that he failed to show that he exercised reasonable
diligence in seeking relief and had failed to show that unless
relief was granted, there would be a complete miscarriage of
justice. He argues that the record affirmatively demonstrates he
did not have the required intent. The district court was free to
reject Monroe’s unsworn, self-serving assertions in favor of his
sworn affidavit and statements under oath. See Blackledge v.
Allison, 431 U.S. 63, 74 (5th Cir. 1977). Monroe thus fails to
show an error resulting in a complete miscarriage of justice. See
United States v. Dyer, 136 F.3d 417, 422, 430 (5th Cir. 1998).
Further, Monroe has failed to offer sound reasons for his failure
to seek relief earlier. Id. The district court did not abuse its
discretion in denying the petition.
AFFIRMED.