Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed Terrance O. Coley's petition for a writ of coram vobis. The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to alter state-court sentences and that coram nobis relief was unavailable because Coley remained in custody and the federal court had not imposed the challenged sentences.
Holdings
- A federal district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to issue a writ of coram nobis or coram vobis to alter a state criminal conviction or sentence because the federal court did not impose the challenged judgment.
- A petitioner who remains in custody on the challenged sentences may not use coram nobis or coram vobis as the vehicle for relief.
Questions Presented
- Whether a federal district court has jurisdiction to issue a writ of coram nobis or coram vobis altering sentences imposed by a state court.
- Whether Coley could use coram nobis or coram vobis relief while remaining in custody on the challenged sentences.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (8)
- Brown v. Commonwealth, 284 Va. 538 (2012)(followed as described by petitioner)
- United States v. Denedo, 556 U.S. 904, 911 (2009)(followed)
- Nabaya v. Lauck, No. 1:23-CV-2650 (ACR), 2024 WL 687967, at *3 n.5 (D.D.C. Feb. 16, 2024)(followed)
- United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502, 511 (1954)(followed)
- Stoller v. United States, 216 F. Supp. 3d 171, 175 (D.D.C. 2016)(followed)
- Rawlins v. Kansas, 714 F.3d 1189, 1196 (10th Cir. 2013)(followed)
- In re Egan, 339 F. App'x 314, 315 (4th Cir. 2009)(followed)
- Minter v. Unknown, No. 7:23CV00647, 2024 WL 2891499, at *2 n.1 (W.D. Va. June 10, 2024)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…