Chestang v. State

Summary

The court treated Chestang's petition styled as seeking coram-vobis relief as a second petition for a writ of error coram nobis because coram-vobis actions had been abolished. It denied the petition, holding that none of Chestang's asserted grounds—an allegedly invalid arrest, juvenile-transfer error, admission of a coerced confession, clerical error, or actual innocence and evidentiary insufficiency—was cognizable in a coram-nobis proceeding. His related motion and affidavit were therefore moot.