United States v. Shaun Reed

670 F. App'x 151
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 4, 2016
Docket16-6902
StatusUnpublished

This text of 670 F. App'x 151 (United States v. Shaun Reed) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Shaun Reed, 670 F. App'x 151 (4th Cir. 2016).

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Shaun Eugene Reed appeals the district court’s order dismissing his petition for a writ of error coram nobis and Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(d) motion to vacate judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. As the district court correctly determined, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide a vehicle by which Reed may challenge his criminal judgment. See United States v. O’Keefe, 169 F.3d 281, 289 (5th Cir. 1999); United States v. Mosavi, 138 F.3d 1365, 1366 (11th Cir. 1998) (per curiam). Additionally, Reed did not satisfy the “four essential prerequisites” needed to obtain coram nobis relief. See Bereano v. United States, 706 F.3d 568, 576 (4th Cir. 2013). We therefore affirm the district court’s order. United States v. Reed, No. 3:05-cr-00003-GMG-JES-1 (N.D. W. Va. June 28, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

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

Related

United States v. Mosavi
138 F.3d 1365 (Eleventh Circuit, 1998)
Bruce Bereano v. United States
706 F.3d 568 (Fourth Circuit, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
670 F. App'x 151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-shaun-reed-ca4-2016.