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:
- A warrant issued 69 days before the alleged offence (pre-crime warrant);
- A warrant signed by a Deputy Clerk, not a judicial officer (4th Amendment violation);
- Affidavits faxed before the oath was sworn (perjury and fabrication);
- Testimony from a DEA "expert" who had not earned his qualifying degree at the time he testified (Glenn Dutton);
- Documents signed by a "Judge John Kabakovich" who does not exist in any United States judicial directory;
- 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 the July 9, 2025 prison-file-swap attempted-murder plot (Sgt. Kenneth Price sentencing proceeding — personally witnessed by Petitioner; see Exhibit I and Petitioner's sworn statement).
Petitioner states, and the record herein demonstrates, that the conduct complained of was not a wrongful-conviction-by-mistake · not a mistaken-identity case · not a good-faith procedural irregularity. The warrant issued 69 days before the alleged offence. High-level official signatures were gathered at approximately 9:30 PM on a single evening (November 29-30, 2005). The affidavit was faxed before it was sworn. The trial "expert" was unqualified by his own later-awarded degree. The RCMP record was fabricated fifteen years after conviction. The retaliation continues in witness-testified real time.
These facts cannot be reconciled with negligence. They are consistent only with malice — intent to cause harm to a specific identified person — originating with DEA Special Agent Glenn Dutton and extending through the chain of named officials. The operational arc is continuous and documented:
- 2004 · Dutton arrests Billy Womack in connection with an alleged MDMA lab; next-day press account changes from "suspect in custody" to "elaborate operation still seeking mastermind" — false premise for continued investigation.
- 2004-2005 · ~15 months · Dutton surveils Petitioner during indictment phase · zero probative evidence obtained.
- 2005 · ~5 additional months · Surveillance continues while Petitioner is lawfully in Canada · total ~20 months with zero evidence.
- November 29, 2005 · When Petitioner walks into Windsor police station for a routine criminal-record clearance check, a CPIC entry has been planted. The pre-dated 2005 Warrant is activated · Petitioner arrested the following day · he had committed no crime and had no advance notice of any US interest.
- 2007 · Digital warrant document shows transition from machine-printed to hand-written text at the substantive-charge insertion point — visible on the face of the extradition packet.
- Nomenclature discrepancy · Warrant names "Francesco Giovanni Longo" · extradition papers process "Francesco Longo" · two identifiers used interchangeably to obscure identity audit.
- 2003 expunged domestic-violence booking photograph was re-used as the booking image referring to Petitioner in the 2005-2007 proceedings · despite expungement · evidencing deliberate image-misappropriation.
- 2011-2013 · BOP release 2011 · landing Windsor, Ontario · release papers nonetheless state Tampa, Florida · no drug-crime booking · no fingerprints on file · 78 months minus 2 years good-time credit places mathematical release at February 2013, inconsistent with 2011 release unless the sentence arithmetic itself was fabricated.
- May 2021 → May 2022 · RCMP record transitions from CLEAN to FBI-entry-dated-February-22-2006 · post-conviction manufacture.
- July 9, 2025 · Price sentencing witnessed by Petitioner · file-swap plot follows.
- October 23-25, 2025 · Nunavut notice · doorbell intercom activation · activation phase of plot.
The operation begins with Dutton in 2004 and continues through 2025. It is not episodic, not accidental, and not reconcilable with good-faith law enforcement. It is a single malicious course of conduct, and Petitioner so alleges.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
-
Jurisdiction is conferred by the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), and by 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and § 2255.
-
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).
-
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.
-
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 Counsel Who Signed as Judge (Alibhai) and the Downstream Phantom (Kabakovich)
4.6 The Form 1 · Section 12 Authorization to Apply for Provisional Arrest Warrant · the originating document of the Canadian extradition side of this matter (Case No. 05-CR-573, Superior Court of Justice, Toronto Region) · was signed at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 29, 2005, by Faiyaz Amir Alibhai, Counsel, International Assistance Group, for the Minister of Justice of Canada. See Exhibit 3 (Alibhai signature page) and Exhibit 3A (Form 1 authorization page).
4.7 Form 1 authorization requires judicial signature. A counsel is not a judge. A counsel in the International Assistance Group of the federal Ministry of Justice cannot, under any reading of the Extradition Act or the Constitution Act, substitute his or her authority for that of a Superior Court judge. The originating authorization is therefore void on its face.
4.8 Separately, the subsequent documents in the extradition packet — those generated after the originating Alibhai authorization — purport to bear the signature of one "Judge John Kabakovich." 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. The 10-letter phantom surname "KABAKOVICH" was constructed to mimic the 11-letter surname of the real presiding judge Elizabeth A. KOVACHEVICH (Tampa federal bench, appointed 1986) — same cadence, different human. The "Kabakovich" signatures are therefore a secondary derivative fabrication, stacked on top of the void Alibhai originating authorization to simulate judicial continuity downstream.
C-bis. The Bellaire 21-Year Arc — Same Officer Initiated 2005 Extradition and 2025 Attempted Murder
4.8a Paragraph 6 of Detective Constable Richard MacCheyne's sworn affidavit (sworn November 30, 2005 at Toronto) reads, in relevant part: "On November 29, 2005 I received a call from officer Jason Bellaire, a member of the Windsor Police Service, who works with the Repeat Offender Parole Enforcement [ROPE] squad. Bellaire informed me that he had received information from a person with the Windsor Police that Longo had come to a detachment to get a criminal police history. When Longo's name was run on CPIC, a hit came back showing he was wanted in the United States. Bellaire contacted a D.E.A. official who confirmed that the U.S. wanted to bring Longo back." See Exhibit B1 (MacCheyne affidavit paragraph 6).
4.8b Jason Bellaire is the same individual who, in 2021, held the rank of Deputy Chief of the Windsor Police Service and who personally directed or approved Petitioner's May 2021 arrest on fabricated mischief charges (the charges that produced the first-ever photographic and fingerprint record of Petitioner — see Section IV.F). In 2025, Bellaire became Chief of Police of the Windsor Police Service, and in that capacity is alleged to bear command responsibility for the July 9 2025 Price file-swap plot described in Section IV.G.
4.8c The same officer thus (a) planted the CPIC trigger that activated the void 2005 Warrant (Paragraph 6 of Exhibit B1 admits this), (b) executed the 2021 re-arrest cycle that generated the first photographic and biometric record (themselves contemporaneous with the CLEAN RCMP return), and (c) held command authority over the 2025 file-swap attempted-murder plot. A single officer's 21-year arc of personal custody of the file destroys any claim of good-faith routine law enforcement and is pleaded as direct evidence of the malicious-course-of-conduct theory advanced at the outset of this Petition.
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 9, 2025, Petitioner personally witnessed Sergeant Kenneth Price of the Windsor Police Service being sentenced in Windsor court on child-exploitation offences. Petitioner was the sole member of the public present in the courtroom that day. Price received a sentence of probation. The outfit Price wore at sentencing is the same outfit visible in Petitioner's photographic record of Price's trial appearance, confirming same-individual identity across both proceedings. On or about that date, Price's disciplinary / child-exploitation file was caused to be inserted into Petitioner's Windsor corrections file. See Exhibit I; see also Petitioner's sworn statement incorporated herein.
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 Since the July 9, 2025 Price-sentencing file-swap plot, Petitioner has continued to experience a sustained pattern of procedural retaliation emanating from Canadian state actors operating in Ontario, including an October 23, 2025 language-rights notice bearing a hand-written case-code that reproduces the 2005 Canadian extradition case number (Case No. 05-CR-573, Superior Court of Justice, Toronto Region), and an October 25, 2025 Windsor Police activation at Petitioner's residence that Petitioner interrupted by refusing admission. The Canadian 2025 retaliation facts are jurisdictionally distinct from the relief sought in this Petition and are pleaded in detail in the Canadian-side companion exhibit (Exhibit 09-E · Canadian Retaliation 2021-2025). They are referenced here solely to preserve the continuing-tort character of the 2005 Warrant's ongoing harm for purposes of the Hazel-Atlas fraud-on-the-court analysis below.
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)
- Exhibit 1 — 27-page 2005 extradition packet
- Exhibit 2 — Deputy-Clerk-signed Warrant (Sheryl L. Loesch)
- Exhibit 3 — "Judge John Kabakovich" phantom signatures
- Exhibit 3A — Judicial-directory search establishing non-existence
- Exhibit 4 — Six-minute-fax cover sheet and header
- Exhibit 4A — MacCheyne affidavit dated one day after fax
- Exhibit 5 — Glenn Dutton trial testimony transcript (2006-2007)
- Exhibit 5A — Dutton academic records showing 2013 degree date
- Exhibit 6 — RCMP response May 2021 (CLEAN)
- Exhibit 6A — RCMP response May 2022 (FBI entry fabricated)
- Exhibit 6B — Windsor Jail custody record for February 22, 2006
- Exhibit I — Ken Price file-swap July 10, 2025
- Exhibit J — Nunavut language-rights notice January 9, 2025 and October 23 warning
- Exhibit K — GitHub vs GA4 suppression (96.9%) with server-log evidence
- Exhibit L — The Floral Justice System proposal (fund-direction declaration)
- Exhibit M — The AB INITIO Master Brief (incorporated by reference)
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)
- 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.
- 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.
- Three copies minimum: original for the Court, one for the USA, one stamped-filed copy for your records.
- All exhibits must be attached as certified copies (notarized or bearing the original source seal).
- 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.
- Filing from outside the US: use FedEx or DHL with tracking; do NOT use USPS international for this — delivery reliability is too low.
- After filing: send a copy of the file-stamped petition by certified mail to each named Respondent-adjacent party in § X. Retain green cards.
- 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