so, whether it can be used to address both matters of fact and law. The uncertainty surrounding coram nobis is aptly described in the following quote: Our decisions are in such confusion on the writ of coram nobis that no one can tell where we stand. In writing on the subject we have wobbled and bobbled like a lost raft at sea. But we are not alone, as other courts likewise seem to be without mast and compass when sailing this sea. Reference to the texts and reported decisions of foreign jurisdictions will show that other courts are in the same state of confusion. The writ of coram nobis appears to be the wild ass of the law which the courts cannot control. It was hoary with age and even obsolete in England before the time of Blackstone, and courts who attempt to deal with it becom 5) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 11. As to the scope of relief available,
holding that to grant a writ of mandamus a court in the exercise of its discretion must be satisfied that the writ is appropriate under the circumstances holding that writ was explicitly abolished by statute holding writ was discharged because relator failed to serve writ within the 33 days prescribed by law holding that coram nobis was abolished by pcr statute holding that attempted felony murder was abolished