Smith v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Petitioner was found guilty of two counts of rape. Before the Supreme Court was Petitioner’s third petition seeking to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis. Petitioner repeated the assertions contained in his first and second petitions, arguing that the prosecution fabricated evidence, that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the judgment, and that the trial court committed error in admitting the evidence. The Supreme Court denied relief, holding that, as with the first and second petitions, Petitioner had not stated a ground for the writ and that Petitioner’s successive application for coram-nobis relief was an abuse of the writ.
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.