Shequita L. JOINER, Petitioner
STATE of Arkansas, Respondent
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
PETITION TO REINVEST JURISDICTION IN THE TRIAL COURT TO
CONSIDER A PETITION FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS [COLUMBIA
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. 14CR-06-211]
COURTNEY RAE HUDSON, Associate Justice.
Petitioner Shequita L. Joiner was convicted by a Columbia
County Circuit Court jury of aggravated robbery and theft of
property for which she was sentenced to an aggregate term of
480 months’ imprisonment. The Arkansas Court of Appeals
affirmed. Joiner v. State, CACR- 08-151, 2008 WL
2444720 (Ark.App. June 18, 2008) (unpublished). Petitioner
now brings this pro se petition to reinvest jurisdiction in
the trial court so that she may file a petition for writ of
error coram in her criminal case. Joiner contends that she
was represented by a public defender who was the
brother-in-law of the prosecutor in her case, which resulted
in a conflict of interest; that the lead investigator in the
case, who "is part of the prosecutor team[,]"
withheld material evidence from the jury; and the prosecutor
misrepresented the testimony of a witness who should have
been charged as an accomplice. Because we find that Joiner’s
not establish a ground for the writ, the petition is denied.
Nature of the Writ
petition for leave to proceed in the trial court is necessary
because the trial court can entertain a petition for writ of
error coram nobis after a judgment has been affirmed on
appeal only after we grant permission. Newman v.
State, 2009 Ark. 539, 354 S.W.3d 61. A writ of error
coram nobis is an extraordinarily rare remedy. State v.
Larimore, 341 Ark. 397, 17 S.W.3d 87 (2000). Coram nobis
proceedings are attended by a strong presumption that the
judgment of conviction is valid. Green v. State,
2016 Ark. 386, 502 S.W.3d 524. The function of the writ is to
secure relief from a judgment rendered while there existed
some fact that would have prevented its rendition if it had
been known to the trial court and which, through no
negligence or fault of the defendant, was not brought forward
before rendition of the judgment. Newman, 2009 Ark.
539, 354 S.W.3d 61. The petitioner has the burden of
demonstrating a fundamental error of fact extrinsic to the
record. Roberts v. State, 2013 Ark. 56, 425 S.W.3d
771. We are not required to accept the allegations in a
petition for writ of error coram nobis at face value.
Jackson v. State, 2017 Ark. 195, 520 S.W.3d 242.
Grounds for the Writ
writ is allowed only under compelling circumstances to
achieve justice and to address errors of the most fundamental
nature. Id. A writ of error coram nobis is available
for addressing certain errors that are found in one of four
categories: (1) insanity at the time of trial, (2) a coerced
guilty plea, (3) material evidence withheld by the
prosecutor, or (4) a third-party confession to the crime
during the time between conviction and appeal. Howard v.
State, 2012 Ark. 177, 403 S.W.3d 38.
Claims for ...