Harry Meyer Katz v. United States of America

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 12-1485
___________________________
Harry Meyer Katz
lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant
v.
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________
Submitted: October 31, 2012
Filed: November 30, 2012
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Former federal inmate Harry Katz appeals the district court’s denial of his1
petition for a writ of error coram nobis. We agree with the court that Katz may not
The Honorable Catherine D. Perry, Chief Judge, United States District Court1
for the Eastern District of Missouri.

-- 1 of 2 --

raise in a coram nobis petition the same claims that he previously litigated in his 28
U.S.C. § 2255 motion. See Sawyer v. Whitley, 505 U.S. 333, 338 (1992) (successive
habeas petition raising identical grounds as prior petition must generally be
dismissed); United States v. Comacho-Bordes, 94 F.3d 1168, 1173 (8th Cir. 1996)
(coram nobis relief is substantially equivalent to habeas relief, and principles barring
successive petitions apply); Azzone v. United States, 341 F.2d 417, 418-19 (8th Cir.
1965) (per curiam) (coram nobis petitioner is not entitled to review of issues that were
considered and resolved either on direct appeal or in § 2255 motion). We also find
that the district court did not err in denying the petition without a hearing or
discovery. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --