Hall v. State (Majority, with Concurring)
Annotate this Case
The Supreme Court denied Petitioner’s petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court so that he may file a petition for writ of error coram nobis in his criminal case, holding that Petitioner did not state a ground for the writ.
In his petition, Appellant argued that the trial court and court of appeals made errors that amounted to a breakdown in both the trial and the direct-appeal proceedings and that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the judgment. The Supreme Court denied relief, holding that error by the trial court or the appellate court is not a ground to grant a writ of error coram nobis and that an attack on the sufficiency of the evidence is not within the purview of a coram nobis proceeding.
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.