Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-05159/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-05159-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jeff A. Hawkins
Plaintiff
Superior Court of Alameda County
Defendant

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFF A. HAWKINS,

Petitioner,

v.

ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR 

COURT,

Respondent.

Case No. 15-cv-05159-DMR (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a document entitled, “Motion for

Coram Vobis to Vacate Sentence.” Dkt. 1. The Court construes his filing as a petition for a writ 

of error coram vobis, in which he challenges his 2005 criminal conviction in the Alameda County 

Superior Court. He has also filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. 6.

This action has been assigned to the undersigned magistrate judge. On November 20, 

2015, Petitioner consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction in this matter. Dkt. 4.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), with written consent of all parties, a magistrate judge may 

conduct all proceedings in a case, including entry of judgment.1 Appeal will be directly to the 

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(3).

A writ of error coram vobis is a “writ of error sent by an appellate court to a trial court to 

review the trial court’s judgment based on an error of fact.” Black’s Law Dictionary 413 (10th ed. 

2014). It is doubtful there is any significant difference in American practice between the writ of 

 

1 A magistrate judge generally must obtain the consent of the parties to enter dispositive rulings 

and judgments in a civil case. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). However, in cases such as this one, 

where the petitioner has consented but the respondent has not been served, “all parties have 

consented pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1),” and a magistrate judge therefore “‘may conduct any 

or all proceedings in a jury or nonjury civil matter and order the entry of judgment in the case.’” 

Gaddy v. McDonald, No. CV 11-08271 SS, 2011 WL 5515505, at *1 n.2 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 9, 2011) 

(quoting § 636(c)(1)) (citing United States v. Real Property, 135 F.3d 1312, 1317 (9th Cir. 1995)).

Case 4:15-cv-05159-DMR Document 7 Filed 01/20/16 Page 1 of 3
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

error corum nobis and the writ of error corum vobis. See 11 Charles A. Wright, Arthur R. Miller, 

& Mary Kay Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure 2d § 2867 at 393 (1995); see also United 

States v. Dellinger, 657 F.2d 140, 144 n.5 (7th Cir. 1981) (“With rare exception, ‘[t]he distinction 

in American practice between coram nobis (“before us”) and coram vobis (“before you”) is only 

nominal.’”) (quoting 7 Moore’s Federal Practice § 60.14 at 46 (2d ed. 1979)). 

The writ of error coram nobis affords a remedy to attack a conviction when the petitioner 

has served his sentence and is no longer in custody. See Telink, Inc. v. United States, 24 F.3d 42, 

45 (9th Cir. 1994); United States v. Walgren, 885 F.2d 1417, 1420 (9th Cir. 1989). A federal 

district court may not entertain a petition for a writ of error coram nobis to challenge a state 

conviction, and presumably this also applies to a petition for a writ of error coram vobis. See 

Sinclair v. Louisiana, 679 F.2d 513, 513-15 (5th Cir. 1982); see also Madigan v. Wells, 224 F.2d 

577, 578 n.2 (9th Cir. 1955) (writ of error coram nobis can only issue to aid jurisdiction of court in 

which conviction was had). Therefore, several common law writs, including writs of error coram 

nobis and writs of error coram vobis, have been abolished in federal civil actions. See Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 60(b). 

Accordingly, the instant petition for a writ of error coram vobis is DISMISSED. 

Leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. Dkt. 6. The Clerk of the Court shall 

enter judgment, terminate any pending motions, and close the file.

This Order terminates Docket No. 6.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 20, 2016 

______________________________________

DONNA M. RYU

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 4:15-cv-05159-DMR Document 7 Filed 01/20/16 Page 2 of 3
3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFF A. HAWKINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ALAMEDA 

COUNTY,

Defendant.

Case No. 4:15-cv-05159-DMR 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. 

District Court, Northern District of California.

That on January 20, 2016, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by 

placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by 

depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery 

receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Jeff A. Hawkins ID: F-18885

Pelican Bay State Prison

P.O. Box 7500

Crescent City, CA 95532 

Dated: January 20, 2016

Susan Y. Soong

Clerk, United States District Court

By:________________________

Ivy Lerma Garcia, Deputy Clerk to the 

Honorable DONNA M. RYU

Case 4:15-cv-05159-DMR Document 7 Filed 01/20/16 Page 3 of 3