NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 21 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 18-35157

Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. 2:14-cr-00072-JLQ

v. MEMORANDUM* TIMOTHY JOSEPH CARLSON,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington Justin L. Quackenbush, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 17, 2018**

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

Timothy Joseph Carlson 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, and we affirm.

This court reviews de novo the district court’s denial of a coram nobis

* 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). petition. See Matus-Leva v. United States, 287 F.3d 758, 760 (9th Cir. 2002). The

district court correctly denied Carlson’s petition. Carlson is still in custody and,

therefore, cannot show that a more usual remedy is unavailable to attack his

conviction. See id. at 761 (“A person in custody may seek relief pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2255. Because the more usual remedy of a habeas petition is available,

the writ of error coram nobis is not.” (footnote omitted)).

AFFIRMED.

2 18-35157