From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Pinkerton

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Oct 6, 2016
No. 16-8072 (10th Cir. Oct. 6, 2016)

Opinion

No. 16-8072

10-06-2016

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN SCOTT PINKERTON, Defendant - Appellant.


(D.C. No. 1:13-CR-00170-ABJ-1)
(D. Wyoming) ORDER AND JUDGMENT Before GORSUCH, BALDOCK, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

John Scott Pinkerton, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's denial of his motion for relief pursuant to a writ of coram nobis. However, coram nobis relief is unavailable to prisoners currently in custody. See United States v. Torres, 282 F.3d 1241, 1245 (10th Cir. 2002) ("[A] prisoner may not challenge a sentence or conviction for which he is currently in custody through a writ of coram nobis."). Because Mr. Pinkerton is challenging the conviction for which he is currently in custody, we AFFIRM the district court's denial of Mr. Pinkerton's motion.

Because Mr. Pinkerton is proceeding pro se, we construe his filings liberally. See Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007). "[T]his rule of liberal construction stops, however, at the point at which we begin to serve as his advocate." United States v. Pinson, 584 F.3d 972, 975 (10th Cir. 2009). --------

We DENY Mr. Pinkerton's motion for default judgment based on the government's failure to file a response brief. See Fed. R. App. P. 31(c) (failing to file appellee brief results in exclusion from oral argument); Boulware v. Baldwin, 545 F. App'x 725, 731 (10th Cir. 2013) (unpublished) ("Electing not to file an appellee's brief waives the right to participate in oral argument, Fed. R. App. P. 31(c), it does not concede the result of the appeal.").

Entered for the Court

Carolyn B. McHugh

Circuit Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Pinkerton

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Oct 6, 2016
No. 16-8072 (10th Cir. Oct. 6, 2016)
Case details for

United States v. Pinkerton

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN SCOTT PINKERTON…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Oct 6, 2016

Citations

No. 16-8072 (10th Cir. Oct. 6, 2016)

Citing Cases

Bailey v. Bailey (In re Steven K. Bailey Aka Tri-State Roofing & Remodeling)

Appellee was not required to participate in this appeal, and Appellant still bears the burden of persuasion.…