Court Opinion

ID: 9369842
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-09 19:00:36.541705+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:17.589851
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        FEB 9 2023
                                                                    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                      U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                          FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                      No.   21-10239

               Plaintiff-Appellee,             D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00678-DGC-1

 v.

JOSEPH MARTIN,                                 MEMORANDUM*

               Defendant-Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the District of Arizona
                  David G. Campbell, District Judge, Presiding

                          Submitted February 7, 2023**
                              Phoenix, Arizona

Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

      Defendant Joseph Martin (“Martin”) appeals the denial of his motion for relief

from judgment filed under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

      *
          This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
         The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
         Martin cannot challenge the final order at issue under rules applicable to civil

proceedings.      Rule 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure unambiguously

provides: “These rules govern the procedure in all civil actions and proceedings in

the United States district courts, except as stated in Rule 81.” The judgment and

order from which Martin seeks relief were not entered in a civil case, but in a

criminal proceeding. Civil Rule 60(b) simply does not provide for the relief Martin

seeks.

         AFFIRMED.

                                             2