United States of America v. Cary W. Medill

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CARY W. MEDILL,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 09-56701
D.C. No. 2:03-cr-00227-DDP
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Dean D. Pregerson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted January 10, 2011**
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Former federal prisoner Cary W. Medill 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.
FILED
JAN 25 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-56701 2
Medill contends that the district court erred by dismissing his coram nobis
petition as untimely. Because Medill has not alleged valid reasons for failing to
attack the conviction earlier, he is not entitled to a writ of coram nobis, and the
district court did not err. See United States v. Kwan, 407 F.3d 1005, 1011 (9th Cir.
2005), abrogated on other grounds by Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct 1473 (2010);
see also Maghe v. United States, 710 F.2d 503, 503-04 (9th Cir. 1983) (per curiam)
(entitlement to writ of coram nobis requires a showing of “sound reasons” for
failure to seek relief earlier).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --