USA v. Eugene Rutledge, No. 08-16810 (9th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED SEP 03 2010 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 08-16810 & 08-16812 D.C. Nos. 4:99-cr-40033-CAW 4:03-cr-40116-CAW v. MEMORANDUM * EUGENE DARREL RUTLEDGE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Claudia A. Wilken, District Judge, Presiding Submitted August 23, 2010 ** Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. In these consolidated appeals, former federal prisoner Eugene Darrell Rutledge 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 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). Rutledge seeks to vacate two prior federal convictions, claiming that his guilty pleas were constitutionally deficient and that his trial counsel was ineffective. Because Rutledge has not alleged valid reasons for failing to attack the convictions earlier, he is not entitled to a writ of coram nobis. 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). AFFIRMED. 2 08-16810

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.