COREY JONES v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Appeals, Watts, Filed Dec. 7, 2015,
Coram Nobis – Laches – The doctrine of laches may bar the right to seek coram nobis relief

Judge Watts writes a well reasoned opinion for the Court useful as a future resource for both Laches and Coram Nobis issues.

Coram Nobis – Laches – The clock for determining whether laches applies begins running “when the petitioner knew or should have known of the facts underlying the alleged error”

Coram Nobis – Laches – The determination of prejudice “may involve not only the State’s ability to defend against the coram nobis petition, but also the State’s ability to reprosecute.”

Coram Nobis – Laches – To establish prejudice, the State need not prove that the delay makes
it impossible to reprosecute a petitioner; instead, the State must prove simply that the delay places the State “in a less favorable position” for purposes of reprosecuting the petitioner

Of course, as it tends to when it needs to support a holding (and otherwise conveniently ignores), the court uses the public interest in finality of conviction and prompt resolution of allegations of error to buttress its argument that laches should apply here…

Recitation of older case law:

Coram Nobis – Elements:

A convicted petitioner is entitled to relief through the common law writ of error coram nobis if and only if:
(1) the petitioner challenges a conviction based on “constitutional, jurisdictional, or fundamental” grounds, whether factual or legal;
(2) the petitioner rebuts the “presumption of regularity [that] attaches to the criminal case”;
(3) the petitioner “fac[es] significant collateral consequences from the conviction”;
(4) the issue as to the alleged error has not been waived or “finally litigated in a prior proceeding, [absent] intervening changes in the applicable law”;
and (5) the petitioner is not entitled to “another statutory or common law remedy”

Coram Nobis – Waiver – CP § 8-401 applies retroactively, such that the petitioner did not waive the right to pursue coram nobis relief by failing to file an application for leave to appeal; (Citing State v. Smith)

Laches – applies where there is an unreasonable delay in the assertion of one party’s rights and that delay results in prejudice to the opposing party

Laches – Moving party must show by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) there was an unreasonable or impermissible delay in asserting a particular claim; and, (2) that they were prejudiced by the delay