discussed Cited "see" United States v. Eileen Crowell See Matus-Leva v. United States, 287 F.3d 758, 761 (9th Cir.2002) (holding petitioner may not resort to coram nobis as a means of bypassing habeas relief under AEDPA, even if the petitioner fails to meet AEDPA’s requirements), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1022 , 123 S.Ct. 544 , 154 L.Ed.2d 431 (2002); Owens v. Boyd, 235 F.3d 356, 360 (7th Cir.2000) (precluding coram nobis as a means available to avoid statutory restrictions on federal habeas relief); United States v. Baptiste, 223 F.3d 188, 189-90 (3d Cir.2000) (per curiam) (holding that coram nobis was unavailable to prisoner who remained in cust…

cited Cited "see" Guevarra v. Ashcroft See Matus-Leva v. United States, 287 F.3d 758, 760 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1022 , 123 S.Ct. 544 , 154 L.Ed.2d 431 (2002).

discussed Cited "see" United States v. Martinez-Pelaez See United States v. Matus-Leva, 311 F.3d 1214, 1217 (9th Cir.) (noting that Apprendi is not implicated in a case that does not involve sentencing factors to be decided by a judge that increase the penalty beyond the statutory maximum), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1022 , 123 S.Ct. 544 , 154 L.Ed.2d 431 (2002).

cited Cited "see" Alvarado-Ortiz v. United States Barrett, 178 F.3d at 54-55 ; see Matus-Leva v. United States, 287 F.3d 758, 761 (9th Cir.), cert. denied , — U.S. -., 123 S.Ct. 544 , 154 L.Ed.2d 431 (2002).