Noble v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Petitioner was found guilty of residential burglary and rape and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of 900 months’ imprisonment. The court of appeals affirmed. Petitioner later filed in the Supreme Court a pro se petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis, alleging that the State had withheld evidence favorable to the defense. The Supreme Court denied the petition. Petitioner subsequently filed a second pro se petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis, alleging that he was incompetent at the time of trial because of mental problems, that the trial court made errors at trial, that the prosecution withheld evidence from the defense, and that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance. The Supreme Court again denied relief, holding (1) Petitioner failed to demonstrate incompetence at the time of trial; (2) claims of trial error do not warrant coram-nobis relief; (3) Petitioner failed to establish a Brady violation; and (4) allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel are not a ground for relief on a petition for writ of error coram nobis.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.