The writ is allowed only under compelling circumstances to achieve justice and to address errors of the most fundamental nature. Pitts , supra . When determining whether a petitioner is entitled to relief as a result of material evidence withheld by the prosecutor, the petitioner must demonstrate that there is a reasonable probability that the judgment of conviction would not have been rendered, or would have been prevented, had theevidence been disclosed at trial. A mere claim of newly discovered evidence in itself is not a basis for relief under coram nobis . Coram nobis proceedings are attended by a strong presumption that the judgment of conviction is valid.
Due diligence is required in making application for relief.
After reviewing the instant petition, we do not find that petitioner was diligent in advancing the issues raised in this petition or that he has stated any good cause to grant leave to proceed with a petition for writ of error coram nobis in the trial court. Petitioner Dansby contends that he is entitled to error coram nobis relief on the ground that two persons, Wayne Mills and Larry Byers, have provided by affidavit exculpatory information that was not available to trial counsel even if counsel had sought the information with due diligence. To place the information contained in the affidavits in context, it is necessary to reiterate some of the circumstances surrounding the murders which are set forth in detail in our decision affirming the judgment. When Clark's parents learned the next morning that she had not returned home, law enforcement authorities began a search for the couple. Later that day, the bodies of Clark and Lewis were found several miles away in another rural area that was designatedas Crime Scene 2.