Love v. State

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the circuit court dismissing Appellant’s petition for writ of error coram nobis, holding that the circuit court did not err in denying the writ of error coram nobis because Appellant did not plead facts to show coercion.On appeal, Appellant argued that the circuit court erred in determining that his allegation that counsel promised to help him get a pardon if he pleaded guilty was insufficient to meet the burden of proving he was coerced. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court did not err in finding that Appellant’s allegation of coercion did not rise to the level of coercion that is required in the context of a writ of coram nobis; and (2) the circuit did not err in finding that Appellant’s claim was more akin to an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, which was not cognizable in an error coram nobis proceeding. View "Love v. State" on Justia Law