ARKANSAS SUPREME COURT No. CACR 01-1015 Opinion Delivered February 19, 2009 PRO SE MOTION FOR KEDRON JOHNSON RECONSIDERATION OF DENIAL OF Petitioner PETITION TO REINVEST JURISDICTION IN THE TRIAL COURT TO CONSIDER A PETITION v. FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS [CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, CR 2000-2710] STATE OF ARKANSAS Respondent MOTION DENIED. PER CURIAM A jury found petitioner Kedron Johnson guilty of rape and sentenced him to 300 months’ imprisonment in the Arkansas Department of Correction. The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment. Johnson v. State, 80 Ark. App. 79, 94 S.W.3d 344 (2002). Petitioner filed in this court a petition in which he requested permission to proceed in the trial court with a petition for writ of error coram nobis, which was denied. 1 Johnson v. State, CACR 01-1015 (Ark. Dec. 19, 2008) (per curiam). Petitioner has now filed a motion in which he requests this court reconsider that decision and appears to seek to bring up the record of his trial. As a part of the public record already filed with the appellate court in the earlier appeal, the trial record was included as a part of the record before us. See Drymon v. State, 327 Ark. 375, 938 1 For clerical purposes, the petition was assigned the same docket number as the direct appeal. After a judgment has been affirmed on appeal, a petition filed in this court for leave to proceed in the trial court is necessary because the circuit court can entertain a petition for writ of error coram nobis only after we grant permission. Dansby v. State, 343 Ark. 635, 37 S.W.3d 599 (2001) (per curiam).
S.W.2d 825 (1997). In fact, we referenced that record in our decision. Petitioner bases his request for reconsideration upon arguments that are grounded in facts known at the time of trial and contained in the record, as were the arguments contained in his original petition. As stated in our previous opinion, for the writ to issue following the affirmance of a conviction, the petitioner must show a fundamental error of fact extrinsic to the record. Larimore v. State, 327 Ark. 271, 938 S.W.2d 818 (1997). Petitioner makes conclusory allegations that the victim committed perjury, but conclusory statements cannot be the basis of postconviction relief. Jackson v. State, 352 Ark. 359, 105 S.W.3d 352 (2003). Because petitioner demonstrates no good cause to reconsider our previous decision, we deny the motion. Motion denied. Brown, J., not participating. -2-
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.