Moten v. State

Summary

The court dismissed Moten’s second pro se petition seeking to reinvest jurisdiction for coram-nobis relief because it repeated the same Brady-based claims raised in his first petition without adding facts sufficient to justify renewal of the writ. The court also concluded that Moten had not shown that the allegedly withheld information would have produced a different outcome, and it held his motion to file a response moot. No separate opinions were filed.