Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gary Jefferson BYRD, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-09-26
Citations: 697 F. App'x 431
Docket Number: No. 16-31244
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gary Jefferson BYRD, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 697
Pages: 431–431

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Gary Jefferson BYRD, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-31244
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed September 26, 2017
Camille Ann Domingue, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA, Cristina Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee
Gary Jefferson Byrd, Pro Se
Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
In 1992 Gary Jefferson Byrd, federal prisoner # 07983-035, was convicted of receiving child pornography through the mail and sentenced to serve 10 years in prison. The district court concluded that the most recent action he filed to challenge this conviction was an unauthorized successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and dismissed it on this basis. Byrd now moves this court for a certificate of appealability (COA), arguing that this action is a writ of coram nobis and that he is entitled to relief on his claims concerning his innocence.
Because Byrd is no longer in custody for the 1992 conviction, he cannot challenge it via a § 2255 motion. See Pack v. Yusuff, 218 F.3d 448, 454 n.5 (5th Cir. 2000). He can, however, bring a writ of coram nobis to challenge this conviction. See United States v. Dyer, 136 F.3d 417, 422 (5th Cir. 1998). Because this action is best classed as sounding in coram nobis, not § 2255, Byrd's COA motion is DENIED AS UNNECESSARY.
The writ of coram nobis may be used to correct only fundamental errors that result in a complete miscarriage of justice. Dyer, 136 F.3d at 430. Because Byrd's claims could have been presented sooner, he has not met this standard. See id.
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.