Court Opinion

ID: 9390516
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-27 18:00:25.490449+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:35.052960
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-20447        Document: 00516728820             Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/27/2023

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

                                      No. 22-20447                          FILED
                                    Summary Calendar                    April 27, 2023
                                    ____________                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                             Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Howard Grant,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Southern District of Texas
                              USDC No. 4:09-CR-424-3
                     ______________________________

   Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
         Howard Grant, former federal prisoner #43671-279, was convicted by
   a jury in 2010 of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and two counts of
   aiding and abetting health care fraud. He appeals the district court’s denial
   of his petition for writ of coram nobis challenging those convictions. The

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-20447      Document: 00516728820           Page: 2    Date Filed: 04/27/2023

                                     No. 22-20447

   Government has filed an opposed motion for summary affirmance and an
   alternative motion for an extension of time in which to file its brief.
          When reviewing the denial of a writ of coram nobis, we review the
   district court’s “factual findings for clear error, questions of law de novo, and
   the district court’s ultimate decision to deny the writ 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). Even affording Grant the liberal
   construction that he is due, he proffers no discernible argument that he has
   satisfied the prerequisites for coram nobis relief. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324
   F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Deputy Sheriff
   Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987); see also United States v. Esogbue, 357
   F.3d 532, 534 (5th Cir. 2004).
          The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.                      The
   Government’s motion for summary affirmance and alternative motion for
   extension of time are DENIED.
          Finally, this court has previously warned Grant that filing frivolous,
   repetitive, or otherwise abusive filings would invite the imposition of
   sanctions and imposed a sanction of $300. See United States v. Grant, 740 F.
   App’x 412, 412–13 (5th Cir. 2018). The warnings and sanction have not
   deterred Grant. Accordingly, a SANCTION IS IMPOSED. Grant is
   ordered to pay a monetary sanction in the amount of $500, payable to the
   clerk of this court. Grant is BARRED from filing, in this court or any court
   subject to this court’s jurisdiction, any challenge to his convictions or
   sentences until the sanction is paid in full unless he first obtains leave of the
   court in which he seeks to file such a challenge. Grant is also WARNED
   that the further filing of frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive challenges
   to his convictions or sentences in this court or any court subject to this

                                              2
Case: 22-20447     Document: 00516728820          Page: 3   Date Filed: 04/27/2023

                                   No. 22-20447

   court’s jurisdiction will subject him to additional and progressively more
   severe sanctions. See In re Lampton, 667 F.3d 585, 590 (5th Cir. 2012).

                                            3