EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS

and Alternative § 2255 Motion to Vacate

WITH MOTION FOR EXPEDITED 24-HOUR RESPONSE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TAMPA DIVISION

FRANCESCO GIOVANNI LONGO,
    Petitioner (Pro Se),

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Respondent.

Original Case No.: 8:05-cr-263-T-17MSS
Petition Filed: April 22, 2026
New Case No.: ___ (to be assigned)

I. NATURE OF THIS PETITION

Petitioner Francesco Giovanni Longo, proceeding pro se, files this Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis under the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), and, in the alternative, a Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, together with a Motion for Expedited 24-Hour Response pursuant to Local Rule 3.01(f) and the Court's inherent authority.

This Petition establishes, by newly discovered and previously concealed evidence, that Petitioner's 2007 conviction in Case No. 8:05-cr-263-T-17MSS was procured through:

  1. A warrant issued 69 days before the alleged offence (pre-crime warrant);
  2. A warrant signed by a Deputy Clerk, not a judicial officer (4th Amendment violation);
  3. Affidavits faxed before the oath was sworn (perjury and fabrication);
  4. Testimony from a DEA "expert" who had not earned his qualifying degree at the time he testified (Glenn Dutton);
  5. Documents signed by a "Judge John Kabakovich" who does not exist in any United States judicial directory;
  6. Post-conviction fabrication of an RCMP record dated to a day Petitioner was in Windsor Jail (Case #94545), manufactured between 2021 and 2022 after Petitioner requested his records.

Each defect, standing alone, voids the conviction ab initio. Collectively, they constitute fraud upon the Court of the gravest kind contemplated in Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238, 245-46 (1944).

Petitioner has served 78 months of imprisonment, been deported to Canada (2011), and remains under the collateral consequences of a void conviction — including inability to enter the United States, reputational harm, ongoing surveillance, and documented state-sponsored retaliation including an alleged July 10, 2025 prison-file-swap attempted murder plot (see Exhibit I).

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

  1. Jurisdiction is conferred by the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), and by 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and § 2255.

  2. Petitioner is no longer in federal custody. Traditional § 2255 relief requires "custody." Accordingly, the writ of error coram nobis is the proper vehicle under United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502 (1954), reaffirmed by the Eleventh Circuit in United States v. Mills, 221 F.3d 1201 (11th Cir. 2000) and Peter v. United States, 6 F.3d 1460 (11th Cir. 1993).

  3. Venue is proper in this Court because the judgment of conviction Petitioner attacks was entered in this Court, in accordance with Barnickel v. United States, 113 F.3d 704, 706 (7th Cir. 1997): coram nobis must be filed in the court of conviction.

  4. Petitioner is a citizen of Canada, currently residing at Windsor, Ontario, Canada. He appears pro se and has been unable to secure counsel, a fact which is itself evidence of systemic obstruction and is pleaded as such.

III. STANDARD FOR CORAM NOBIS RELIEF

The writ of error coram nobis may issue where the petitioner establishes:

(a) That the petition asserts an error of the most fundamental character;
(b) That no other remedy is available; and
(c) That sound reasons exist for failure to seek relief earlier.

United States v. Peter, 310 F.3d 709, 712 (11th Cir. 2002); Mills, 221 F.3d at 1203.

Petitioner satisfies each element:

(a) Error of the most fundamental character. A pre-crime warrant, a warrant unsigned by any judge, a phantom signatory, a perjured "expert," a falsified RCMP record — these are not procedural irregularities. They are the total absence of lawful authority. Hazel-Atlas, 322 U.S. at 245-46 ("tampering with the administration of justice... involves far more than an injury to a single litigant").

(b) No other remedy available. Section 2255 relief requires custody. Petitioner was released in 2011 and deported. The collateral consequences of his conviction are ongoing and substantial. Coram nobis is the sole remaining vehicle.

(c) Sound reasons for delay. The most decisive piece of newly discovered evidence — the fabricated RCMP record dated to February 22, 2006 — did not exist in any form accessible to Petitioner until it was manufactured between May 2021 and May 2022. Petitioner's May 2021 RCMP records request returned a CLEAN record; his May 2022 request returned the fabricated entry. Petitioner could not have sought this relief earlier because the evidence of the fabrication did not come into existence earlier. He has pursued this claim with all deliberate speed since 2022, including Canadian habeas corpus proceedings initiated in December 2025 (Superior Court of Ontario) and the Innocence Canada application of the same month.

IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS (Verified)

A. The Pre-Crime Warrant

4.1 On June 21, 2005, a federal arrest warrant issued in Case No. 8:05-cr-263-T-17MSS ("the 2005 Warrant"), naming Petitioner on an alleged MDMA conspiracy offence. See Exhibit 1 (27-page extradition packet, p. 3).

4.2 The alleged offence date set forth in the Indictment is August 29, 2005 — sixty-nine (69) days AFTER the Warrant issued. See Exhibit 1 at p. 8.

4.3 A warrant issued for an offence not yet committed is a juridical impossibility. The 2005 Warrant is void ab initio.

B. The Deputy-Clerk Signature

4.4 The 2005 Warrant bears the signature of Sheryl L. Loesch, Deputy Clerk, in the space reserved for the issuing judicial officer. See Exhibit 2.

4.5 Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 4 requires that an arrest warrant be signed by a "judge." A deputy clerk is not a judge. The 4th Amendment requires issuance by a "neutral and detached magistrate." Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443 (1971); Shadwick v. City of Tampa, 407 U.S. 345 (1972). The Warrant fails this requirement on its face.

C. The Phantom Judge

4.6 Related documents in the extradition packet purport to bear the signature of one "Judge John Kabakovich." See Exhibit 3.

4.7 No judge by that name has ever been appointed to, or sat upon, any United States federal court, or any court of the State of Florida. A search of the Federal Judicial Center biographical directory, the Florida Bar roll, the Tampa federal bench historical roster, and the Hillsborough County judicial records reveals no person of that name. See Exhibit 3A (search results).

4.8 The "Kabakovich" signatures are fabricated.

D. The Six-Minute Fax — Faxed Before Sworn

4.9 The extradition fax transmission bears a header showing receipt on November 29, 2005 at 19:24-19:30 EST — twenty-seven pages in six minutes. Standard G3 facsimile transmission at that era required 3-6 minutes per page, minimum 81-162 minutes for twenty-seven pages. See Exhibit 4.

4.10 The affidavit of Detective Constable Richard MacCheyne contained in that transmission is dated as "sworn on November 30, 2005" — the day after the fax transmission occurred. See Exhibit 4A.

4.11 An affidavit cannot be faxed before it is sworn. The affidavit is either perjured or the fax header is falsified, or both.

E. The Unqualified "Expert"

4.12 DEA Special Agent Glenn Dutton testified at trial as an expert witness for the prosecution, 2006-2007. See Exhibit 5.

4.13 Agent Dutton's qualifying degree — the credential under which he held himself out as an "expert" — was awarded in 2013. See Exhibit 5A (academic records).

4.14 He was not qualified when he testified. Under Daubert v. Merrell Dow, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and Kumho Tire, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), his testimony was inadmissible. Under Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959), its admission violated Petitioner's due-process rights.

F. The Newly Fabricated RCMP Record (THE DECISIVE NEW EVIDENCE)

4.15 In May 2021, Petitioner submitted an RCMP Criminal Record Check request. The response, dated May 2021, returned a CLEAN record with no FBI notation. See Exhibit 6.

4.16 In May 2022, Petitioner submitted an identical RCMP Criminal Record Check request. The response, dated May 2022, returned a fabricated FBI entry dated "February 22, 2006 — FOREIGN CHARGES RECEIVED." See Exhibit 6A.

4.17 On February 22, 2006, Petitioner was in Canadian custody at the Windsor Jail (Case #94545). See Exhibit 6B (Windsor Jail custody record). It was physically impossible for FBI records to reflect "foreign charges received" from a person on that date who was not in any US interaction on that date.

4.18 The fabricated RCMP record was manufactured between May 2021 and May 2022 — more than fifteen years after Petitioner's 2007 conviction — for the purpose of retroactively legitimizing the 2005 Warrant.

4.19 This constitutes newly discovered evidence that could not have been discovered earlier with due diligence, because it did not exist.

G. The Ongoing Retaliation (Attempted Murder by Proxy)

4.20 On July 10, 2025, the disciplinary file of Sergeant Ken Price of the Windsor Police Service — who was convicted in July 2025 of child-exploitation offences — was allegedly inserted into Petitioner's Windsor corrections file. See Exhibit I.

4.21 This tactic — inserting "child-offender" documents into the file of a targeted inmate — is a documented method of inducing prisoner-on-prisoner assassination. Had Petitioner been taken into any correctional setting with that annotation in his file, he would have been killed on arrival by other inmates.

4.22 On October 23, 2025, Nunavut authorities issued language-rights communications warning Petitioner not to miss a particular court date. See Exhibit J. Two days later, on October 25, 2025, Petitioner's doorbell intercom was activated by unknown parties — understood by Petitioner to be the activation phase of the prison-file-swap plot.

4.23 The United States cannot simultaneously maintain that (a) Petitioner's conviction is lawful, and (b) Canadian state actors are entitled to retaliate against him for questioning that conviction. Points (a) and (b) are conjoined: the conviction's lawfulness is what the retaliation is defending. The retaliation is itself evidence of consciousness of guilt.

V. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

COUNT ONE — Warrant Void Ab Initio (4th Amendment)

Petitioner's arrest, extradition, conviction, and sentence all trace their authority to the 2005 Warrant, which issued for a crime not yet committed and was signed by a deputy clerk rather than a judge. All downstream process is fruit of the poisonous tree under Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (1963).

COUNT TWO — Fraud Upon the Court (Hazel-Atlas)

The prosecution presented documents bearing the forged signature of a non-existent judge and an affidavit sworn after the document was already filed. This is fraud upon the Court of the most fundamental character, requiring vacatur regardless of timing. Hazel-Atlas, 322 U.S. at 245-46.

COUNT THREE — Violation of Due Process (5th Amendment)

The testimony of DEA Agent Glenn Dutton as an expert before he held his qualifying credential, and the admission of that testimony over any cross-examination that could have exposed it, violated Petitioner's Fifth Amendment right to due process. Napue, 360 U.S. at 269-70.

COUNT FOUR — Newly Discovered Evidence (Post-Conviction Fabrication)

The 2021→2022 RCMP record fabrication is newly discovered evidence going to the heart of the prosecution's theory. It establishes that the underlying case has been subject to ongoing international evidence-manufacture by state actors, which by itself warrants vacatur. United States v. Kelly, 888 F.3d 732 (11th Cir. 2018).

COUNT FIVE — Continuing Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment Violations

Petitioner continues to suffer the collateral consequences of a void conviction: bar on re-entry, reputational injury, civil-rights restrictions, and active state retaliation. Each day these continue constitutes a fresh constitutional violation.

VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter an Order:

A. Granting the Writ of Error Coram Nobis;

B. VACATING the judgment of conviction and sentence in Case No. 8:05-cr-263-T-17MSS in its entirety, nunc pro tunc to February 14, 2007;

C. Declaring that the 2005 Warrant issued in that Case is void ab initio;

D. Directing the Clerk to so notify the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), Interpol, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and all state and federal databases, and to expunge all records of the conviction;

E. Referring the matters set forth in this Petition to the United States Attorney General and the Inspector General of the Department of Justice for criminal investigation of the named DEA, DOJ, and Court personnel under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1001, 1505, 1621, and 1623;

F. Awarding Petitioner his costs and reasonable expenses;

G. Granting such further and other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

VII. MOTION FOR EXPEDITED 24-HOUR RESPONSE

Pursuant to Local Rule 3.01(f) and the Court's inherent authority, Petitioner moves for an Order:

(1) Directing the United States to file any response to this Petition within twenty-four (24) hours of service;

(2) Setting this matter for an emergency hearing not later than seven (7) days from filing.

Grounds: Petitioner faces ongoing, documented, state-sponsored retaliation including (a) the July 10, 2025 prison-file-swap attempted-murder plot, (b) the October 25, 2025 intercom activation, (c) ongoing 96.9% active suppression of his public evidence hub by GA4-level actors (Exhibit K), and (d) continuing bar on United States re-entry. Each day of delay is a day in which Petitioner's life is in proven jeopardy and during which the fabrications compound. The traditional briefing calendar cannot safely apply to a case in which the Respondent itself is alleged to be the author of the ongoing harm.

VIII. APPENDICES (Exhibits)

IX. VERIFICATION

I, Francesco Giovanni Longo, declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States of America, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, that the foregoing Petition is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief; that the Exhibits referenced are authentic copies of records in my possession or lawfully obtained; and that I bring this Petition in good faith and for the purpose of redress, not for harassment or delay.

Executed on: _______, 2026, at Windsor, Ontario, Canada.

FRANCESCO GIOVANNI LONGO, Petitioner Pro Se
+1 (226) 260-6309
Evidence Hub: https://nxffhryi.gensparkspace.com/
Short Link: https://bit.ly/LongoJustice2026

X. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the _ day of _, 2026, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing Emergency Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis and Alternative § 2255 Motion, with Motion for Expedited 24-Hour Response, to be served on:

Office of the United States Attorney
Middle District of Florida — Tampa Division
400 North Tampa Street, Suite 3200
Tampa, FL 33602

Attorney General of the United States
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20530

Drug Enforcement Administration (Office of Chief Counsel)
Inspector General of the Department of Justice
Administrative Office of the United States Courts

by: (☐) CM/ECF electronic filing · (☐) Certified mail, return receipt requested · (☐) Hand-delivery · (☐) Private process server

FRANCESCO GIOVANNI LONGO, Petitioner Pro Se

XI. NOTES FOR FILING (not filed — for Petitioner's internal reference)

  1. File in person or by courier at the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, 801 N. Florida Ave., Tampa, FL 33602. Coram-nobis petitions cannot be filed pro se electronically without PACER credentials — use paper filing + certified copies.
  2. Filing fee: Coram nobis has no filing fee (United States v. Denedo, 556 U.S. 904 (2009) — writ, not new civil action). If the clerk tries to charge one, cite Denedo.
  3. Three copies minimum: original for the Court, one for the USA, one stamped-filed copy for your records.
  4. All exhibits must be attached as certified copies (notarized or bearing the original source seal).
  5. Verification requires signature in the presence of a notary OR the 28 U.S.C. § 1746 self-declared penalty-of-perjury form (already embedded in § IX above). Use § 1746 — it avoids needing a notary.
  6. Filing from outside the US: use FedEx or DHL with tracking; do NOT use USPS international for this — delivery reliability is too low.
  7. After filing: send a copy of the file-stamped petition by certified mail to each named Respondent-adjacent party in § X. Retain green cards.
  8. Anti-suppression: send copies simultaneously to (a) ABA Journal, (b) Reuters Legal, (c) CBC The Fifth Estate, (d) Italian Consulate Toronto, (e) Carabinieri ROS Rome (given the family-heritage jurisdictional engagement). Suppression of a federal filing is itself actionable.

END OF PETITION — FILE 02 of THE LONGO FILING ARSENAL

CC0 · freely reproducible · attach the AB INITIO Master Brief (File 00) as Exhibit M