Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

234 W. Va. 427

Cline v. Mirandy

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided November 3, 2014

West Virginia Supreme Court · decided 2014-11-03

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 2017

8 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2014-11-03

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Justice KETCHUM,

¶1concurring:

¶2There may be occasions after a prisoner’s ’ release when newly discovered facts, such as DNA, demonstrate' the released prisoner’s innocence. Under these circumstances, the released prisoner would still have a remedy under the writ of coram nobis.

¶3Generally, a released prisoner may have his judgment of conviction reviewed by means of coram nobis when:

¶41. There were errors of fact relied upon in obtaining the conviction;

¶52. The facts were not apparent on the record and they affect the validity and regularity of the underlying proceeding;

¶63. The facts were unknown to the defendant or his/her lawyer at the time of the underlying proceedings, without fault on their part; and

¶74.The newly discovered facts, if known, would have prevented the judgment of conviction.

¶8See, Franklin D. Cleckley, West Virginia Criminal Procedure, § 11-508 (1994).

/234/wva/427 · .json · Public domain