Case ID: f-appx_77/html/0180-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alfred E. SMITH, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 03-6975.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Sept. 30, 2003.
    Decided Oct. 8, 2003.
    Alfred E. Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Richard Ascik, OFfice of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Alfred Smith seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis filed under 28 U.S.C. § 1651 (2000). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Although the district court resolved Smith’s claims on the merits, a writ of error coram nobis is available only when the petitioner is not in custody. See, e.g., United States v. Sawyer, 239 F.3d 31, 37 (1st Cir.2001). As Smith is in federal custody by virtue of his supervised release status, see United States v. Pregent, 190 F.3d 279, 283 (4th Cir.1999), he is not entitled to relief under § 1651. United States v. Noske, 235 F.3d 405, 406 (8th Cir.2000). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order denying relief on that basis. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.