Chestang v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial in 2005, Petitioner was found guilty of aggravated robbery. Petitioner was sentenced to 240 months’ imprisonment. The court of appeals affirmed. In 2014, Petitioner filed in the Supreme Court a pro se petition requesting that jurisdiction be reinvested in the trial court so that he could proceed with a petition for writ of error coram nobis. The Court denied the writ. Petitioner subsequently filed a pro se petition in the Supreme Court to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram vobis. The Supreme Court treated the petition for a writ of coram vobis as Petitioner’s second coram-nobis petition and denied the petition, holding that Petitioner’s claims either should have been addressed in the trial court or were not cognizable in 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.