From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Indelicato

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Feb 22, 2017
No. 15-16970 (9th Cir. Feb. 22, 2017)

Opinion

No. 15-16970

02-22-2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICHAEL INDELICATO, Defendant-Appellant.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 3:85-cr-00078-EMC-1 MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Edward M. Chen, District Judge, Presiding Submitted February 16, 2017 San Francisco, California Before: TASHIMA and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and ADELMAN, District Judge.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

The Honorable Lynn S. Adelman, District Judge for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, sitting by designation. --------

Michael Indelicato appeals the denial by the district court of his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. We affirm.

Indelicato was convicted of firearms offenses in 1985, and this court affirmed on direct appeal. United States v. Indelicato, 800 F.2d 1482 (9th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). Indelicato provides no valid reasons for waiting until 2014 to collaterally attack his convictions. See United States v. Riedl, 496 F.3d 1003, 1004 (9th Cir. 2007). His claims do not rest on newly discovered evidence or a change in the law, and any mis-advice by his lawyers in the mid-1980s cannot excuse his failure to take any action for over 25 years.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Indelicato

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Feb 22, 2017
No. 15-16970 (9th Cir. Feb. 22, 2017)
Case details for

United States v. Indelicato

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICHAEL INDELICATO…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Feb 22, 2017

Citations

No. 15-16970 (9th Cir. Feb. 22, 2017)