United States v. Maiss ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                   UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    For the Fifth Circuit
    No. 01-30665
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    VERSUS
    ALAN MAISS,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    For the Eastern District of Louisiana
    (94-CR-391-ALL)
    July 22, 2002
    Before DAVIS, DEMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Alan Maiss appeals the district court’s denial of his petition
    for a writ of coram nobis.     Maiss argues the bill of information
    and factual basis pursuant to which he was charged and convicted
    were insufficient, and that he is entitled to coram nobis relief
    based on the flawed nature of these documents. Specifically, Maiss
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this
    opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under
    the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    contends his conviction must be vacated because the district court
    was without jurisdiction to enter a judgment of conviction and the
    information failed to charge an offense punishable by law.    Maiss
    further argues the district court erred in denying his petition
    based on the doctrine of laches.
    First, we recognize that the information on which Maiss was
    convicted was defective in that it did not sufficiently allege an
    overt act of concealment on the part of Maiss.      However, Maiss’
    argument concerning the district court’s lack of jurisdiction
    fails.   Recently, in United States v. Cotton, the Supreme Court
    held that an indictment’s failure to allege an essential element of
    an offense did not constitute a jurisdictional defect.    
    122 S. Ct. 1781
    , 1785 (2002).
    Second, Maiss has not shown that his delay in bringing his
    petition was excusable, nor has he overcome the Government’s
    assertions of prejudice caused by this delay. See United States v.
    Dyer, 
    136 F.3d 417
    , 427-29 (5th Cir. 1998).   Maiss’ contention that
    the district court erred in denying his petition based on the
    doctrine of laches also fails.   Accordingly, the district court’s
    judgment is AFFIRMED.
    AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-30665

Filed Date: 7/23/2002

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2014