People v. Mbaabu, 213 Cal.App.4th 1139, ____, 152 Cal.Rptr.3d 818, 823-824 (4th Dist. Feb. 14, 2013) (The writ of error coram nobis is granted only when three requirements are met. Those requirements are set forth in the decision of People v. Shipman (1965) 62 Cal.2d 226, at page 230, 42 Cal.Rptr. 1, 397 P.2d 993: (1) Petitioner must show that some fact existed which, without any fault or negligence on his part, was not presented to the court at the trial on the merits, and which if presented would have prevented the rendition of the judgment. (2) Petitioner must also show that the newly discovered evidence does not go to the merits of issues tried; issues of fact, once adjudicated, even though incorrectly, cannot be reopened except on motion for new trial. This second requirement applies even though the evidence in question is not discovered until after the time for moving for a new trial has elapsed or the motion has been denied. (3) Petitioner must show that the facts upon which he relies were not known to him and could not in the exercise of due diligence have been discovered by him at any time substantially earlier than the time of his petition for the writ. These factors, set forth in Shipman, continue to outline the modern limits of the writ. (People v. McElwee, supra, 128 Cal.App.4th at p. 1352, 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 448.)).