With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 59 (1960) (noting that a writ of error coram nobis was, at common law, a civil proceeding), appeal dismissed, 13 A.D.2d 518, 212 N.Y.S.2d 569 (1961). Most other jurisdictions agree that a proceeding on a writ of error coram nobis remains a civil matter independent of the underlying case even though its resolution may affect the underlying case. See generally Ex parte Wilson, 275 Ala. 439, 440, 155 So.2d 611, 612 (1963) (“Coram nobis proceedings are essentially civil in nature____”); State ex rel. Cutsinger v. Spencer, 219 Ind. 148, 155, 41 N.E.2d 601, 603 (1941) (“[T]he petition for the writ of error coram nobis must be considered a new proceeding, civil in nature____”); State v. Miller, 161 Kan. 210, 214, 166 P.2d 680, 683, cert. denied, 329 U.S. 749, 67 S.Ct. 76, 91 L.Ed. 646 (1946) (<HOLDING>); Commonwealth v. Sirles, 267 S.W.2d 66, 66

A: holding that coram nobis may not issue when alternative remedies such as habeas corpus are available
B: holding same for writ of error coram nobis
C: recognizing common law rule that the proceedings upon an application for a writ of error coram nobis were like proceedings in habeas corpus regarded as civil in character
D: recognizing that under the common law applications for writs of error coram nobis were civil in character
C.