Court Opinion

ID: 9393951
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-11 18:01:36.537145+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:56.398866
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30485        Document: 00516746898             Page: 1      Date Filed: 05/11/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit

                                                                                       FILED
                                      No. 22-30485                                   May 11, 2023
                                    Summary Calendar
                                    ____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                      Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Michael Nelson,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                               USDC No. 2:93-CR-55-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Stewart, Duncan, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Michael Nelson, former federal prisoner # 02461-095, filed a petition
   for writ of coram nobis alleging misconduct by law enforcement in connection
   with his 1994 drug convictions. The district court denied the petition and
   subsequently denied Nelson’s motion to alter or amend the judgment under

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-30485      Document: 00516746898           Page: 2    Date Filed: 05/11/2023

                                     No. 22-30485

   Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) and motion to supplement the Rule
   59(e) motion. Nelson appeals.
          We review the district court’s “decision to deny the writ [of coram
   nobis] for abuse of discretion.” Santos-Sanchez v. United States, 548 F.3d
   327, 330 (5th Cir. 2008), vacated on other grounds, 559 U.S. 1046 (2010).
   “The writ [of coram nobis] will issue only when no other remedy is available
   and when sound reasons exist for failure to seek appropriate earlier relief.”
   United States v. Dyer, 136 F.3d 417, 422 (5th Cir. 1998) (internal quotation
   marks, brackets, and citation omitted); see also United States v. Esogbue, 357
   F.3d 532, 535 (5th Cir. 2004). As Nelson fails to show why his claims
   presented in his petition for a writ of coram nobis could not have been raised
   previously, he fails to show an abuse of the district court’s discretion. See
   Esogbue, 357 F.3d at 535.
          “Under Rule 59(e), amending a judgment is appropriate (1) where
   there has been an intervening change in the controlling law; (2) where the
   movant presents newly discovered evidence that was previously unavailable;
   or (3) to correct a manifest error of law or fact.” Demahy v. Schwarz Pharma,
   Inc., 702 F. 3d 177, 182 (5th Cir. 2012); see also Seven Elves, Inc. v. Eskenazi,
   635 F.2d 396, 402 (5th Cir. 1981). We review the denial of relief under Rule
   59(e) for abuse of discretion. See Trevino v. City of Fort Worth, 944 F.3d 567,
   570 (5th Cir. 2019). Nelson’s argument challenging the denial of Rule 59(e)
   relief, including the denial of his motion to supplement, does not present any
   changes in the law, new evidence, or manifest errors in the order denying of
   coram nobis relief. Nelson has failed to show that the district court abused
   its discretion in denying relief under Rule 59(e). See Trevino, 944 F.3d at 570;
   Seven Elves, 635 F.2d at 402.

                                              2
Case: 22-30485     Document: 00516746898         Page: 3   Date Filed: 05/11/2023

                                  No. 22-30485

         Nelson has also filed a motion entitled “Judicial Notice.” This
   pleading requests no specific relief separate from his arguments on appeal.
   The motion is unnecessary.
         AFFIRMED; MOTION DENIED AS UNNECESSARY.

                                           3