James E. Smith, Petitioner v. State of Arkansas, Respondent

Summary

The court dismissed the petitioner’s third application for leave to pursue coram-nobis relief because it repeated claims raised in his two earlier petitions and constituted an abuse of the writ. The court held that the alleged Brady material did not establish a reasonable probability that the judgment would have been prevented, given the victims’ testimony and the absence of any identified substantial inconsistency. It also held that claims challenging evidentiary rulings, trial error, sufficiency of the evidence, and witness credibility were not cognizable in a coram-nobis proceeding.