Opinion
21-35359
01-25-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROSHON E. THOMAS, AKA Rollin Roy Phillips, Defendant-Appellant.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Submitted January 19, 2022 [**]
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington Rosanna Malouf Peterson, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 2:03-cr-00129-RMP-1
Before: SILVERMAN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM [*]
Roshon E. Thomas appeals pro se from the district court's order denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo, see United States v. Riedl, 496 F.3d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir. 2007), and we affirm.
Thomas contends that his 2004 conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine must be vacated because he received ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with a suppression motion. We agree with the district court that this claim, which Thomas raised unsuccessfully in two prior 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motions, does not warrant the "highly unusual remedy" of coram nobis relief. See Riedl, 496 F.3d at 1005-06 (listing requirements for coram nobis relief).
Thomas's motion to supplement and correct his reply brief is granted. The Clerk will file the supplemental reply brief received at Docket Entry No. 19.
AFFIRMED.
[*] 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).