1

2
3

0232
Steven J. Bank
5112 Mountain View Dr.
Las Vegas, NV 89146
Tel 702-340-6548 (cell)
Email: superfiler@outlook.com
IN PRO SE

4
5
6

8 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA

8
9
10

STEVEN J. BANK,
PETITIONER,

11
12
13
14
15

vs.
STATE OF NEVADA
RESPONDENT.

) CASE NO. __C-16-313898

)
)
) DEPT. NO . ________2______
)
) (Related case no: C-14-302181-1)
)
) AMENDED PETITION FOR
) OF ERROR CORAM
) NOBIS;EXPUNGEMENT

WRIT

Under the All Writs Act

16
17
18

NATURE OF THE ACTION

19
20

Pursuant to the Nevada Constitution, Article 6, section 6(1), Petitioner Steven J.

21

Bank (Petitioner or BANK) hereby petitions and moves for a writ of coram nobis to

22

vacate Petitioners conviction to correct an error of the most fundamental character

23

and prevent a manifest injustice from occurring. Per Nevadas Justice Douglas:

24
25

We hold that the common-law writ of coram nobis is available under Article 6, Section 6(1) of the

26

Nevada Constitution, which grants district courts the power to issue writs that are proper and necessary

27

to the 'complete exercise of their jurisdiction, and NRS 1.030, which continues the common law under

28

some circumstances. FROM Trujillo v. Nevada, Supreme Court No. 58937 (adv. Opinion), 2013.

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 1

SENTENCING

After serving a sentence of 313 days in the Clark Co. Detention Center, BANK

3
4

stands convicted of an act that has no substantive support in the case file; No physical

evidence including forensic evidence- was retained by the Police. Under the tenets of

Supreme Court case Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (1988), a bad faith showing

on the part of the Police is sufficient to cast doubt on the prosecution. From footnote

7,

There is no need in this case to discuss whether the police have a duty to test evidence, or whether due
process requires that police testing be on the "cutting edge" of technology. But uncertainty as to these

10

questions only highlights the importance of preserving evidence, so that the defense has the

11

opportunity at least to use whatever scientifically recognized tests are available. That is all that is at

12

issue in this case.,Id, Footnote 7.

13
14

Thus, a jurisprudent judicial officer who was truly independent would never have

15

allowed such an unsubstantiated allegation to move forward, especially given the

16

availability of Brady Material.

17
18
19
20
21
22

In addition, BANK seeks expungement of the conviction pursuant to 18 U.S.C.

3231.
Petitioner has attempted to correct the error by contacting the Districts Attorney via
E-mail, to no avail. See EXHIBIT 1, Email to Ms. Noreen Demonte.
BANK faces adverse consequences as a result of the defective conviction; Prior to

23

sentencing, he sought, by all available means, to SET ASIDE the GUILTY PLEA

24

AGREEMENT, to no avail. At sentencing, he requested that the Court entertain a

25

PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, also to no avail; Had sentencing not gone

26

forward on the 24th of March, 2016, BANK would likely have been held in

27

contempt, only to restart the proceeding 30 days later. Simply put, BANK had no

28

choice in the matter but to be sentenced.

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 2

Despite manifold cases in both State and Federal (below) allowing for a plea

withdrawals (setting aside plea agreement) prior to sentencing, the judge denied his

requests (although no prejudice would have resulted to the prosecution in this

particular instance)

There are errors of fact outside the record which could not have been raised earlier

than this instant matter, although an attempt was made at rendition of sentence when

the PSI was being challenged. Thus, the sentence and conviction is fundamentally

erroneous. EXHIBIT 2.

JURISDICTION

10
11

This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this proceeding under under Article 6,

12

Section 6(1) of the Nevada Constitution, and NRS 1.030.

13

UNDISUPTED FACTS

14
15
16
17
18
19
20

2015

GUILTY PLEA AGREEMENT FOR ATTEMPTED

BURGLARY
1.BANK

was charged with one count of Attempted Burglary, a Class C Felony

on October 15th, 2014.

2. The Hon. Janiece Marshall, Las Vegas Justice Court J.O.P. Dept. 3,

21

departed upwards when setting bail based on BANKs numerous arrests and

22

charges in the State. (EXHIBIT 3) However, she failed to understand the

23

outcome (disposition) of the various cases. (EXHIBIT 4 and 5).

24

Thus, rather than grant an instant O.R. based on his successful defense of

25

over 12 criminal cases in this State, she presumed he had been convicted on

26

all. [Further; Note: the pre-trial services investigation contained a plain error, a

27

fact which she overlooked in spite of BANKs manifold filings challenging said

28

(erroneous) conviction. The case in question is a CA Battery, 1999. (See exhibit

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 3

5): PRE-TRIAL services stated: F Batt PO 1999, as the disposition; the true

disposition is as stated in the PSI report, a M, with 193 days credit, etc).

3 . BANK entered into a Guilty Plea Agreement on April 27th, 2015. In

exchange for the Guilty Plea, the government agreed not to oppose an Own

Recognizance release.

6
7

4. The stipulated factual basis for his conviction of Attempted Burglary is as

follows:

a. BANK entered into a garage at 1304 Montclair St. (Charleston Heights

neighborhood), and was subsequently held down [no mention of Battery] by

10

two residents until Police arrived. These two residents stated that he moved a

11

washing machine towards the door, attempting to steal it. Police canvassed

12

the area, found nothing, and charged him with Attempted Burglary for

13

attempting a Grand Larceny, basing their Declaration of Arrest on hearsay, i.e.,

14

the witness statements alone. No evidence was retained by Police. Youngblood,

15

supra.

16

b. At sentencing, BANK attempted to correct errors in the record, stating

17

[Deft.] stated the synopsis in the report is inaccurate, as it should read the boyfriend was

18

beating the suspect, and blood was everywhere (minutes of March 24th, 2016).

19
20

5. On March 24th, 2016, the Court sentenced BANK to 313 days in the Clark Co.

21

Detention Center, suspending the sentence, as well as an 18 month supervised

22

release.

23

ARGUMENT

24
25

A. LEGAL STANDARD

26
27

The Ninth Circuit has recognized that petitions for coram nobis under the All Writs Act

28

may provide relief for persons who have grounds to challenge the validity of their

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 4

conviction but are not eligible for habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255Matus-Leva v.

U.S. , 287 F. 3d 758, 760 (9TH Cir. 2002). The coram nobis writ allows a court to vacate

a conviction where the petitioner establishes that : (1) a more usual remedy is not

available; (2) valid reasons exist for not attacking the conviction earlier; (3) adverse

consequences exist from the conviction sufficient to satisfy the case or controversy

requirement of Article III; and (4) the error is fundamental in character. Id.

7
8
9

1.

A MORE USUAL REMEDY IS NOT AVAILABLE BECAUSE THE

SENTENCING JUDGE WILL BE HEARING IT.

10
11

BANKs submission of a Post-Conviction Habeas Corpus Petition will reach Dept. 12.

12

Unquestionably, Judge LEAVITT will not grant the Writ, not willing to overturn her

13

own judgment.

14
15

2.VALID REASON EXISTS WHY PETITIONER COULD NOT MAKE

16

AN EARLIER CHALLENGE TO THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF HIS

17

CONVICTION, INASMUCH AS HE WAS COERCED INTO ENTERING

18

HIS CULPABILITY IN ORDER TO RETURN TO LIBERTY.

19
20

from WIKIPEDIA, COERCION:

21
22
23
24

Coercion /korn/ is the practice of forcing another party to act in an

involuntary manner by use of intimidation or threats or some other form of
pressure or force.[1] It involves a set of various types of forceful actions that violate
the free will of an individual to induce a desired response.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion) (emphasis added)

25
26
27

It became clear, on every single court date that BANK appeared in Dept. 3, that
J. Marshall was only concerned with one outcome: a bindover. EXHIBIT 7,
Petitioners AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT.

28

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 5

1
2

3.PETITIONER BANK CONTINUES TO SUFFER ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES

FROM HIS CONVICTION INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO FINDING WORK;
ALSO, HIS REPUTATION HAS BEEN IRREPARABLY DAMAGED.

3
4
5
6
7

BANK obtained an HONORS DIPLOMA from MICDS, St. Louis, MO, in

1989, and was subsequently enrolled at Stanford University beginning in 1989,
where he declared Religious Studies and Classics. He then transferred to San Jose
State University in 1995 to study music with the countrys then foremost
percussion pedagogue, Anthony J. Cirone, a pupil of renowned timpani master

Saul Goodman of the Philadelphia Symphony. He then studied Music Theory

privately in Berkeley, CA between the years 2002-2006. His re-issues and re-

10

masters of rock and roll music can be heard in every classic rock station across

11

the U.S.A.

12

Prior to receiving his six-figure inheritance and purchasing a flat in San Jose ,

13

CA in 1998, (said loan having been paid back in full) , he never had a serious

14

incident or criminal complaint filed against him. The subsequent malicious

15

prosecutions, events which forced him to begin to read and study law, have

16
17
18

created great financial hardship for him.

In addition, BANK has lost the right to own a firearm as a direct consequence of
this wrongful conviction, being a member of the NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION.
[Gun Home Safety Course; Medford, OR. 2008].

19
20

4.THE

ERROR OF BANK BEING CONVICTED AND PUNISHED

21

FOR AN ACT THAT THE LAW DOES NOT MAKE CRIMINAL IS

22

FUNDAMENTAL.

23
24
25

The error in BANKs case is of the most fundamental character. AS the U.S.
Supreme Court stated emphatically in Bousley v. United States, a conviction and

26
27
28

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 6

punishmentfor an act that the law does not make criminalresults in a

complete miscarriage of justice. 523 U.S. 614, 620-21 (1998).1

2
3
4

5. MR. BANK IS ENTITLED TO HAVE HIS CASE REVIEWED FOR

THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL ERRORS.

6
7
8
9
10
11

Mr. Banks conviction is one of those cases where the errors were of the
most fundamental character that is, such as rendered the proceeding itself
irregular and invalid. United States v. Mayer, 235 U.S. 55, 69 (1914). United
States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502, 512 (1954). To be prosecuted for offense
conduct that is not criminal is such an error, and may be addressed with this
Court issuing a writ of coram nobis vacating the conviction

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Other events exist in the Courts proceedings, such as Hearing of a Motion

without any submissions (Replies or Rebuttals) by counsel-of-record, or, with
BANK absent, having therefore no Oral Argument whatsoever because attorney
John P. Parris was out of the jurisdiction for an extended period of time ( and
substitute counsel Matsuda was in no way informed what the issues being
raised were, at Oral Argument! Its no wonder that the MOTION TO SET ASIDE
GUILTY PLEA (which was constructively filed in PRO SE), was unequivocally
denied by the sentencing judge.)

20
21

B. VACATING HIS CONVICTION IS NOT A BREACH OF MR.

22

BANKS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN ANSWERING

23

THE CRIMINAL CHARGES.

24
25
26
27
28

To pursue the defaulted claim in habeas, he must first demonstrate either "cause and actual
prejudice," e. g., Murray v. Carrier, 477 U. S. 478, 489, or that he is "actually innocent," id., at 496.

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 7

i. WITHDRAWAL OF GUILTY PLEA STANDARD PURSUANT TO NRS

176.195 and Woods v. State, 114 Nev. 468, 475 (1998).

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Nevada Law grants a Defendant the right to withdraw a plea of guilty so long as
the request to do so is made before a sentence is imposed. NRS 176.195. The
decision to allow a Defendant to withdraw his guilty plea is within the
discretion of the District Court. State v. Adams, 94 Nev. 503, 505 (1978);
United States v. Alber, 56 F.3d 1106, 1111 (9th Cir. 1995). The Court may
grant a motion to withdraw a guilty plea prior to sentencing for any
substantial, fair, or just reason. Woods v. State, 114 Nev. 468, 475 (1998);
United States v. Ruiz, 257 F.3d 1030, 1031 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc). Courts

10

consider the "totality of the circumstances" in determining whether

11

withdrawing a plea would be "fair and just." (Stevenson v. State, 131 Nev. Adv.

12

61, 2015)

13
14
15
16
17

Defendant BANK had spent a county year in jail awaiting a fair Preliminary
Hearing and/or subsequent Trial on charges he vehemently denied from the
outset. This uncompromising denial of the allegations as charged by the
District Attorney was ongoing for six months; When it became clear that
another six months in custody were pending if BANK were to keep proclaiming

18

his innocence, the entry of a mea culpa to secure liberty and attend to urgent

19

legal matters seemed like a necessary price to pay.

20
21
22
23
24

BANK was aware all along that, prior to sentencing, the setting aside of a
Guilty Plea Agreement, in cases carrying no prejudice to the prosecution, was
available as a presupposed remedy, based on extensive case law granting said
plea withdrawals.

25

Given his indigent circumstances, and the Historic cases granting criminal

26

defendants various inalienable rights per the Constitutions 4th, 5th, and 6th

27

Amendments- since the 20th Century, a trial where BANK could issue

28

subpoenas, depose so-called witnesses, request evidence (discovery) by way of

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 8

1
2
3

experts, marshall facts (if necessary), and perform comprehensive legal

analysis, setting aside the G.P.A. and setting a trial date would seem to be fair
and just.
Furthermore, several times, J. Marshall claimed that BANK made

4
5

admissions. In practice, BANK has no authority to make any such

admissions; Admitting evidence is strictly the Courts prerogative.

7
8

Bank never admitted to anything in the official documents; His efforts were
always to present facts not in the record.

Further, BRADY MATERIAL is extant, but unreviewed and, therefore,

10
11

unknown as to its probative (or exculpatory) value!2

12

C. EXPUNGMENT.

13

After a conviction is invalidated, district courts possess ancillary

14
15

jurisdiction to expunge criminal record. That jurisdiction flows out of the

16

congressional grant of jurisdiction to hear cases involving offenses against the

17

United States pursuant to 18 U.S.C. , sec. 3231. U.S. v. Sumner, 226 F. 3d

18

1005, 1014 (9th cir. 2000).

19

Here, in the event the Court grants this petition and invalidates the

20

conviction, petitioner respectfully requests that this Court order the record of

21

the conviction expunged and sealed. Accordingly, petitioner has demonstrated

22

appropriate, extraordinary and unusual circumstances sufficient to warrant

23

the relief of expungement.

24
25
26
27
28

These exculpatory images are available in a compact disk; the true contents
bear no resemblance to the actual allegations contained in the Police report.
They will show that no damage to any door was present, and that the
washer/dryer was never moved. Furthermore, there will be no images of any
gun, caulking or otherwise; They will show, however, blood on the floor of
the garage.

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 9

RELIEF SOUGHT

1
2
3

Petitioner respectfully requests that the Court grant the instant petition and issue
an order:

4
5

Vacating and setting aside petitioners 2015 conviction for Attempted Burglary , in
its entirety.

6
7

i.

and

8
9

Expunging and sealing all records of the foregoing arrest, and conviction;

ii.

Granting such other and further relief as the Court may deem just,
equitable and proper.

10

CONCLUSION

11
12
13
14
15
16
17

For all the above reasons, it is respectfully submitted that the court has a
rare opportunity to correct miscarriage of justice; Mr. Bank stands convicted of
simply walking onto the premises, and act that the law does not make
criminal. We respectfully ask the court to vacate and set aside Mr. Banks
conviction for Attempted Burglary, and expunge and seal records of the
foregoing arrest, and conviction.

18
19
20
21
22

Dated this 5th day of May, 2016.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
STEVEN J. BANK

23
24

_______________________

25

By: Steven J. Bank IN PRO SE

26
27

(address as above)

VERIFICATION

28

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 10

1
2
3

STATE OF NEVADA}
COUNTY OF CLARK}

S.S.

The Petitioner named in the foregoing Petition for

Writ of Error being duly swron, says the facts and

allegations contained therein are true, except so far

as they are stated to be on information, and that he

believes them to be true.

8
9
10
11

_________________________________
Petitioner Steven J. Bank

12
13

(signature)

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

Per NRS 53.045:I declare under penalty of perjury of

the laws of the state of Nevada the above to be true
and correct.
________________ ____________________ ______________

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

PETITION FOR CORAM NOBIS - 11