Case ID: f-appx_615/html/0468-01.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. Vincent George PARKS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 14-16527.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 25, 2015.
    
    Filed Sept. 2, 2015.
    Christiaan Highsmith, Assistant U.S., Office of the Us Attorney, Sacramento, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Vincent George Parks, Atwater, CA, pro se.
    Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
      
         The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Vincent George Parks 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. We review de novo the district court’s denial of a petition for a writ of error coram nobis, see United States v. Riedl, 496 F.3d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir.2007), and we affirm.

In 1983, Parks pled guilty to armed bank robbery. He now contends that this conviction is invalid, because he received ineffective assistance of counsel and was abandoned by his attorney. Because Parks has not shown a valid reason for failing to attack his conviction earlier, he is not entitled to a writ of error coram nobis. See id. at 1006-07.

In a filing received by the court on August 3, 2015, Parks raises several challenges to a separate set of convictions and sentences from 1998. Because these arguments were not raised in Parks’ petition before the district court, we decline to consider them on appeal. See Cacoperdo v. Demosthenes, 37 F.3d 504, 507 (9th Cir.1994).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.