Case ID: f-appx_693/html/0554-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kenneth Charles MCNEIL, a.k.a. Chip, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 16-15472
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 26, 2017
    
    Filed July 3, 2017
    Marshall H. Silverberg, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Ronald G. Johnson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, DOJ—Office of the US Attorney, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Randall Riccardo, Mill Valley, CA, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Former federal prisoner Kenneth Charles McNeil appeals from the district court’s order denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.G. § 1291. We review the denial of a coram nobis petition de novo, see United States v. Riedl, 496 F.3d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir. 2007), and we affirm.

McNeil challenges his 2003 jury-trial conviction for interstate travel with intent to violate a protective order, alleging that the district court improperly instructed the jury with the parties’ stipulated instruction regarding intent. Because McNeil has not shown an error “of the most fundamental character,” he is not entitled to a writ of error coram nobis, and the district court properly denied relief. See id. at 1005-06.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       -pjjjg disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.