[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
THIRD PETITION TO REINVEST JURISDICTION IN THE TRIAL COURT TO
CONSIDER A PETITION FOR A WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS [BENTON
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. 04CR-07-1672]
R. Henington, pro se petitioner.
Rutledge, Atty Gen., by: Joseph Karl Luebke, Asst Atty
Gen., for respondent.
DAN KEMP, Chief Justice
Petitioner Danny Ray Henington brings this third pro se
petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to
consider a writ of error coram nobis. In the petition,
Henington primarily alleges that prejudicial testimony
provided by the States expert witness was admitted at trial
without objection from counsel or an admonishment from the
trial court. Henington contends that the errors of trial
counsel and the trial court in the admission of this
testimony deprived him of due process. Because Heningtons
claims are not cognizable in coram nobis proceedings, we deny
his petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to
consider a petition for a writ of error coram nobis.
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. The burden is on
the petitioner in the application for coram nobis relief to
make a full disclosure of specific facts relied upon and not
to merely state conclusions as to the nature of such facts.
McCullough v. State, 2017 Ark. 292, 528 S.W.3d 833.
was convicted by a jury in 2009 of raping a five-year-old
girl in 2007 and ...