In Re: David Acevedo, No. 15-1732 (4th Cir. 2015)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1732 In Re: DAVID A. ACEVEDO, Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. (3:05-cr-00214-JRS-1) Submitted: October 28, 2015 Decided: November 4, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. David A. Acevedo, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: David A. Acevedo petitions this court for a writ of error coram nobis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) (2012). In his petition, Acevedo alleges that his convictions are invalid and seeks an order from this court vacating his criminal judgment. A writ conviction of when error coram there is a nobis can be fundamental used error to vacate resulting conviction, and no other means of relief is available. United States v. Denedo, 556 U.S. 904, 911 (2009). a in See But see Carlisle v. United States, 517 U.S. 416, 429 (1996) (noting “it is difficult to conceive of a situation in a federal criminal case today where a writ of coram nobis would be necessary or appropriate”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). The remedy is also limited to petitioners who are no longer in custody pursuant to their conviction. 429. is See Carlisle, 517 U.S. at “As a remedy of last resort, the writ of error coram nobis granted only where an error is of the most fundamental character and there exists no other available remedy.” United States v. Akinsade, 686 F.3d 248, 252 (4th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted). We conclude that Acevedo fails to entitled to a writ of error coram nobis. establish that he is Accordingly, although we grant Acevedo leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for a writ of error coram nobis. 2 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 3

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.