Frank Abel and John G. Grimes v. Harry C. Tinsley, Warden, Colorado State Penitentiary
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judge.
The trial court denied without hearing appellants’ motion in the nature of coram nobis. Previously appellants, prisoners in the Colorado penitentiary under a state conviction, had been denied habeas corpus relief and this court had affirmed. 1 The motion asserts that the denial of habeas relief was procured by fraud.
Coram nobis is not an available remedy. Coram nobis is a step in the criminal case 2 and is used to correct fundamental errors which render the proceeding irregular and invalid. 3 Habeas corpus is a civil proceeding. 4 The use of coram nobis in civil…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Von Moltke v. GilliesSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Rogers v. RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- United States v. MorganSupreme Court of the United States · 1954
- United States v. MayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Kurtz v. MoffittSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Toney Gomes, Jr. v. Ellen L. WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1970
- Winfield Associates, Inc. v. W. L. StonecipherCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1970
- Thomas v. Colorado Trust Deed Funds, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1966
- Kathleen k.wilkin v. Sunbeam CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1972
- Luis Pagan v. American Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1976
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.