Washington v. State
2014 Ark. 370
Ark.2014Background
- In 2003, Washington was convicted of residential burglary, aggravated robbery, and first-degree battery and sentenced to 480 months overall.
- Washington appealed to the Arkansas Court of Appeals and then to the Arkansas Supreme Court pro se seeking coram nobis relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
- The Supreme Court has historically limited writs of error coram nobis to four categories and requires extrinsic facts not in the record.
- Washington’s first petition argued counsel’s license was suspended; the court denied, treating it as ineffective-assistance claims not cognizable in coram-nobis proceedings.
- In his second petition, Washington again claimed ineffective assistance and raised Trevino-based arguments; the court found coram-nobis inappropriate for such claims and declined to recall the mandate.
- The Court denied the petition, holding no cognizable coram-nobis basis and no ground to recall the appellate mandate in a non-death-penalty case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether coram nobis may be used for ineffective assistance of counsel | Washington | Washington's claims are not cognizable in coram-nobis | Denied |
| Whether Trevino expands coram-nobis scope to ineffective assistance | Washington relies on Trevino | Trevino does not expand coram-nobis scope | Denied |
| Whether sufficiency of the evidence is reviewable in coram-nobis | Washington claims insufficient identification at trial | Sufficiency not cognizable in coram-nobis | Denied |
| Whether recall of the direct-appeal mandate is warranted | Petitioner seeks recall due to counsel license issue | No error in appellate process shown | Denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Cromeans v. State, 2013 Ark. 273 (Ark. 2013) (coram-nobis limited to extrinsic errors; not for routine claims)
- Burgie v. State, 2013 Ark. 356 (Ark. 2013) (ineffective-assistance claims not within coram-nobis scope)
- Jarrett v. State, 2014 Ark. 272 (Ark. 2014) (Trevino does not broaden coram-nobis remedy)
- Nelson v. State, 2014 Ark. 91 (Ark. 2014) (claims of ineffective assistance outside coram-nobis scope)
- Zulpo v. State, 2014 Ark. 14 (Ark. 2014) (scope of coram-nobis not expanded for new arguments)
- Nooner v. State, 2014 Ark. 296 (Ark. 2014) (mandate recall limited; death-penalty context distinguished)
- Engram v. State, 360 Ark. 140 (Ark. 2004) (post-conviction considerations in appellate review)
- Williams v. State, 2011 Ark. 541 (Ark. 2011) (coram-nobis requires extrinsic factual showings)