UNITED STATES v. HERNANDEZ ZAVALA (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

Abraham Hernandez-Zavala appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and, reviewing de novo, see Matus-Leva v. United States, 287 F.3d 758, 760 (9th Cir. 2002), we affirm.

“The writ of error coram nobis is a highly unusual remedy, available only to correct grave injustices in a narrow range of cases where no more conventional remedy is applicable.” United States v. Chan, 792 F.3d 1151, 1153 (9th Cir. 2015). Hernandez-Zavala’s petition argued that his 2012 conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326, should be vacated due to an alleged error in the presentence report. However, the district court properly denied the petition because Hernandez-Zavala is currently “in custody” in connection with his 2012 conviction. See United States v. Monreal, 301 F.3d 1127, 1132 (9th Cir. 2002). “A person in custody may seek relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.” Matus-Leva, 287 F.3d at 761. Therefore, Hernandez-Zavala cannot avail himself of coram nobis relief because he cannot show that a more usual remedy is unavailable to attack his conviction. See id.

In light of this disposition, we do not reach the parties’ remaining arguments.

AFFIRMED.