From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Jerdine

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
May 24, 2010
379 F. App'x 963 (11th Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 09-15974 Non-Argument Calendar.

May 24, 2010.

Anthony L. Jerdine, Youngstown, OH, pro se.

Laura Thomas Rivero, Anne R. Schultz, Emily M. Smachetti, U.S. Attorney's Office, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. D.C. Docket No. 05-20251-CR-ASG.

Before CARNES, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.


Anthony Lewis Jerdine, a felon on supervised release, appeals pro se the denial of his petition for a writ of error coram nobis under the All Writs Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). Jerdine argued that his conviction was void because the statute that conferred jurisdiction on the district court, 18 U.S.C. § 3231, was unconstitutional. We affirm.

The All Writs Act gives federal courts authority to issue "all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions land agreeable to the usages and principles of law." 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a). A district court may issue a writ of error coram nobis only if "there is and was no other available avenue of relief and "the error involves a matter of fact of the most fundamental character which has not been put in issue or passed upon and which renders the proceeding itself irregular and invalid." Alikhani v. United States, 200 F.3d 732, 734 (11th Cir. 2000). We review the denial of a writ of error coram nobis for abuse of discretion. Id.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Jerdine a writ of error coram nobis. Jerdine had available other means to challenge his conviction, and he previously challenged without success the jurisdiction of the district court in a petition for a writ of mandamus, In re Jerdine, No. 06-11534 (11th Cir. June 8, 2006), and a motion to vacate, Jerdine v. United States, No. 09-16240 (11th Cir. Apr. 21, 2010). See Alikhani, 200 F.3d at 734. Jerdine argues on appeal that he also is entitled to relief because he was effectively denied counsel during his guilty plea proceedings and his guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily made, but we will not consider these arguments for the first time on appeal. See Tannenbaum v. United States, 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998). Jerdine is not entitled to extraordinary relief.

The denial of Jerdine's petition for a writ of error coram nobis is AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Jerdine

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
May 24, 2010
379 F. App'x 963 (11th Cir. 2010)
Case details for

U.S. v. Jerdine

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Anthony L. JERDINE…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Date published: May 24, 2010

Citations

379 F. App'x 963 (11th Cir. 2010)

Citing Cases

Jerdine v. U.S.

Jerdine challenges the refusal of the district court to treat his filing as a petition for a writ of error…

Elmour v. Government Ofvirgin Islands

Id. Moreover, a trial court may issue a writ of error coram nobis only if "the error involves a matter of…