United States of America v. Timothy Joseph Carlson

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TIMOTHY JOSEPH CARLSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 18-35157
D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00072-JLQ
MEMORANDUM*
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).
FILED
DEC 21 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 18-35157
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 of 2 --