USA v. Cary Medill, No. 09-56701 (9th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED JAN 25 2011 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 09-56701 D.C. No. 2:03-cr-00227-DDP v. MEMORANDUM * CARY W. MEDILL, Defendant - Appellant. 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. * 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). 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 09-56701

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.