United States of America v. Vy Thi Thach

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
VY THI THACH,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 11-35435
D.C. No. 2:00-cr-00059-JCC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
John C. Coughenour, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submission Deferred May 9, 2012
Seattle, Washington
Submitted April 5, 2013
Before: HAWKINS, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Vy Thi Thach appeals the denial of her petition for a writ of error coram nobis.
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.
Thach’s petition rises or falls on whether Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356
(2010), applies retroactively. It is therefore foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s
FILED
APR 09 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

The Supreme Court declined to consider Chaidez’s arguments that Teague’s1
bar on retroactivity should not apply when a petitioner challenges a federal conviction,
or at least should not apply when there is a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Chaidez, 133 S. Ct. at 1113 n.16.
2
decision in Chaidez v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 1103, 1105 (2013), which held that
“under the principles set out in Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), Padilla does not
have retroactive effect.”
That the Supreme Court applied Teague in evaluating Chaidez’s challenge to
her federal conviction reinforces our authority holding that Teague’s framework
applies to collateral attacks on federal convictions. See United States v. Sanchez-1
Cervantes, 282 F.3d 664, 667 (9th Cir. 2002) (Teague applies to federal prisoners).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --