Harris v. State

Summary

The court dismissed the appeal from the denial of Harris's coram nobis petition because it was clear that he could not prevail, rendering his motion for an extension of time to file his brief moot. The court held that ineffective-assistance claims must be raised under the designated postconviction procedure, not through coram nobis, and that Harris's conclusory competency claim did not identify a previously unknown fundamental fact. The court also applied the rule that an appeal from a postconviction-relief denial will not proceed when the appellant cannot prevail.