[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
PETITION TO REINVEST JURISDICTION IN THE TRIAL COURT TO
CONSIDER A PETITION FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS [BENTON
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. 04CR-10-1326]
Breeden, Jr., pro se appellant.
Rutledge, Atty Gen., by: Brad Newman, Asst Atty Gen., for
DAN KEMP, Chief Justice
Petitioner Jackie Breeden, Jr., brings this pro se petition
to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to allow him to
file a petition for writ of error coram nobis in his criminal
case. In the petition, Breeden contends that the State
withheld material evidence from the defense by not complying
with pretrial discovery. Withholding evidence from the
defense can constitute a violation of Brady v.
Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215
(1963), which is a ground for coram nobis relief, but
Breedens claim falls short of establishing that there was a
Brady violation in his case. Accordingly, 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
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.