Roger E. Cline v. Patrick A. Mirandy, Warden (Separate)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
13-1200 — Cline v. Patrick A. Mirandy, Warden FILED November 3, 2014 Justice Ketchum, concurring: RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA There 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. Generally, a released prisoner may have his judgment of conviction reviewed by means of coram nobis when: 1. There were errors of fact relied upon in obtaining the conviction; 2. The facts were not apparent on the record and they affect the validity and regularity of the underlying proceeding; 3. The facts were unknown to the defendant or his/her lawyer at the time of the underlying proceedings, without fault on their part; and 4. The newly discovered facts, if known, would have prevented the judgment of conviction. See, Franklin D. Cleckley, West Virginia Criminal Procedure, §II-508 (1994).
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.
