Augustin Flores Chavez v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Augustin Flores Chavez v. United States

447 F.2d 1373, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8388

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedAugust 24, 1971

Docket71-1928

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 447 F.2d 1373 (Augustin Flores Chavez v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Augustin Flores Chavez v. United States, 447 F.2d 1373, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8388 (9th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

Augustin Flores Chavez petitioned the district court for a writ of error coram nobis, challenging the lawfulness of a 1946 federal narcotics conviction. At the time of his petition, appellant was in state prison serving a sentence which had been enhanced as a result of the 1946 prior. Shortly before the hearing scheduled in the district court the state court modified appellant’s sentence by disregarding the challenged federal conviction. Consequently, the district court, on motion of the United States, dismissed the coram nobis action as moot. This appeal followed.

The district court’s dismissal was error. In Byrnes v. United States, 408 F. 2d 599 (9th Cir. 1969) we held that a coram nobis proceeding is not moot merely because the petitioner “had long since served the sentences” imposed as a result of the challenged conviction. We stated that “a criminal case is moot only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.” 408 F.2d at 601, quoting Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 57, 88 S.Ct. 1889, 20 L.Ed.2d 917 (1968). The Government made no such showing.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Augustin Flores Chavez petitioned the district court for a writ of error coram nobis, challenging the lawfulness of a 1946 federal narcotics conviction. At the time of his petition, appellant was in state prison serving a sentence which had been enhanced as a result of the 1946 prior. Shortly before the hearing scheduled in the district court the state court modified appellant’s sentence by disregarding the challenged federal conviction. Consequently, the district court, on motion of the United States, dismissed the coram nobis action as moot. This appeal followed.

The district court’s dismissal was error. In Byrnes v. United States, 408 F. 2d 599 (9th Cir. 1969) we held that a coram nobis proceeding is not moot merely because the petitioner “had long since served the sentences” imposed as a result of the challenged conviction. We stated that “a criminal case is moot only if it is shown that there is no possibility that any collateral legal consequences will be imposed on the basis of the challenged conviction.” 408 F.2d at 601, quoting Sibron v. New York, 392 U.S. 40, 57, 88 S.Ct. 1889, 20 L.Ed.2d 917 (1968). The Government made no such showing.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

447 F.2d 1373, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/augustin-flores-chavez-v-united-states-ca9-1971.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack