Adam Davis, Jr., Petitioner v. State of Arkansas, Respondent

Summary

The court dismissed Davis’s third petition seeking permission to reinvest the trial court with jurisdiction to consider coram-nobis relief, concluding that his repeated and newly asserted claims were either procedurally barred, not cognizable in coram-nobis proceedings, or unsupported by sufficient facts. The court held that Davis did not identify new extrinsic information undermining the competency determination or establish a reasonable probability that his claims would succeed. His motion to respond to the State’s response was moot.