Opinion
Civil Action No. 04-3635.
September 7, 2004
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Richard Miller is a citizen of Jamaica. According to Mr. Miller, he was convicted in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, as a result of crimes related to the possession of marijuana; according to Mr. Miller, he was sentenced as a result of this conviction to two years of probation on September 26, 2000. According to Mr. Miller, he was arrested by federal authorities, with the intent to deport him to Jamaica, on November 5, 2002, and he states that he remains in such custody.
Mr. Miller proceeded to file two habeas corpus petitions in this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241; one was transferred to another federal court, the other was denied outright by this court.
On August 2, 2004, Mr. Miller filed in this federal district court his "Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis." This petition alleges that his sentence in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania, should be vacated by this federal district court on grounds of alleged prosecutorial misconduct and alleged constitutionality ineffective counsel. It appears to the court that Mr. Miller does not comprehend what a petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis is. According to Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (1990), "`Writ of Error Coram Nobis' is (a) procedural tool whose purpose is to correct errors of fact only, and its function is to bring before the court rendering the judgment matters of fact which, if known at (the) time judgment was rendered, would have prevented its rendition (emphasis added)." In the Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis filed by Mr. Miller, he is raising arguments concerning this court's interpretation of established federal LAW ; he is not alleging any newly discovered FACTS which could not have been previously discovered through due diligence. On this ground alone, this court feels compelled to disallow Mr. Miller's Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. Moreover, even if Mr. Miller was entitled to coram nobis relief, such relief may only be given, as previously stated, by the court rendering the judgment. We are therefore of the view that this petition should be filed, if at all, and without this court's comment on its merits, before the court which rendered the judgment attacked (that court being the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania).
In addition, ". . . coram nobis has been traditionally used to attack convictions with continuing consequences when the petitioner is no longer `in custody.'" United States v. Baptiste, 223 F.3d 188, 189 (3d Cir. 2000), quoting, United States v. Stoneman, 870 F.2d 102, 1-5-106 (3d Cir. 1989). As Mr. Miller currently remains incarcerated, Baptiste and Stoneman argue persuasively for denial of the Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. The mere fact that relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 or 28 U.S.C. § 2254 is precluded by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 does not mean that an alternative route to the same goal is available by means of a Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. Baptiste, 223 F.3d at 189.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that Mr. Miller's Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE.