Houston v. State
Wisconsin Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.
The plaintiff in error urges only two grounds for the granting of his petition for writ of coram nobis: (1) That his counsel “conspired, conjured, and wil-fully betrayed all rights of your petitioner, before, during, and after the trial;” and (2) that Elizabeth Welbes, whom he assumed should have been a codefendant, testified under compulsion, coercion, and intimidation for the prosecution for the state resulting in perjured testimony and his ultimate conviction.
The writ of error coram nobis, also known as the writ of coram nobis, is an ancient common-law writ seldom used in the early…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In re ErnstWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
- State ex rel. Davis v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1896
- Ernst v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923
- State v. TurpinWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949
- Gelosi v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Mikulovsky v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1972
- State v. SchillWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Jessen v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1980
- Parent v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- State v. GrisgraberSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.