9th Cir.

USA v. Barlow

June 1, 2026 ·3:22-cr-08092-SMB-7 ·Unpublished · By James Taylor

The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court order denying a defendant's motion to vacate a criminal judgment. The court held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure sixty applies only to civil actions and cannot be used to challenge a criminal conviction.

Background

Brenda Lisa Barlow appealed pro se from a district court order denying her motion to vacate her criminal judgment and her motion for reconsideration. She had been convicted of conspiracy to commit tampering with an official proceeding in violation of Section eighteen thousand five hundred twelve, subsection K of the United States Code.

The court’s reasoning

The panel concluded that the district court did not err in determining that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure sixty could not be used to vacate a criminal judgment. The court noted that the rule explicitly governs procedure in all civil actions and proceedings. Additionally, the court found no abuse of discretion in denying the motion for reconsideration.

What it means going forward

This decision reinforces that civil procedural rules cannot be invoked to overturn criminal convictions, limiting post-conviction relief avenues in such contexts.