Filed: Mar. 31, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7656 In Re: ROBERT CALVIN CRAIG, JR., Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. (CA-95-182) Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 31, 1999 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Calvin Craig, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: R
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7656 In Re: ROBERT CALVIN CRAIG, JR., Petitioner. On Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. (CA-95-182) Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 31, 1999 Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Calvin Craig, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Ro..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-7656
In Re: ROBERT CALVIN CRAIG, JR.,
Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis.
(CA-95-182)
Submitted: March 25, 1999 Decided: March 31, 1999
Before WILKINS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Robert Calvin Craig, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Robert Calvin Craig, a North Carolina inmate, petitions for a
writ of error coram nobis in an effort to obtain relief from a
prefiling injunction and fine imposed because of his repeatedly
filing frivolous actions. Coram nobis is an extraordinary remedy
to be used to remedy the most fundamental errors in a conviction
after a sentence has been served. See United States v. Mandel,
862
F.2d 1067, 1075 (4th Cir. 1988). Craig’s petition does not satisfy
these criteria, and we therefore deny the petition. We deny the
motions to proceed in forma pauperis, to expedite, and to strike,
and we dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
arguments are adequately presented in the materials before the
court, and argument would not significantly aid the decisional
process.
PETITION DENIED
2