Washington v. State

by
After a jury trial, Petitioner was found guilty of residential burglary, aggravated robbery, and first-degree battery. The court of appeals affirmed. Petitioner subsequently filed a pro se petition requesting permission to proceed with a petition for writ of error coram nobis, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The petition was denied. Petitioner then filed a second petition, which the Supreme Court construed as a request that jurisdiction be reinvested in the trial court so that Petitioner may proceed with a petition for writ of error coram nobis, claiming that he was denied effective assistance of counsel and that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain the judgment-and-commitment order, and requesting that the Court recall the direct-appeal mandate. The Supreme Court denied the petition, holding that Petitioner’s claims were either not cognizable in coram-nobis proceeding or were without merit.View "Washington v. State" on Justia Law