Justia Arkansas Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

After a jury trial, Appellant was found guilty of aggravated robbery. The court of appeals affirmed. Appellant subsequently filed a pro se petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1, raising multiple allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. The trial court denied the petition without a hearing. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the trial court’s order denying Appellant’s Rule 37.1 petition was inadequate because it did not contain sufficient written findings to sustain conclusively the trial court’s decision that Appellant was entitled to no relief. Remanded. View "Walden v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Petitioner was found guilty of rape and terroristic threatening in the first degree. The court of appeals affirmed. Petitioner subsequently filed a petition requesting that jurisdiction be reinvested in the trial court so that he may proceed with a petition for writ of error coram nobis, alleging in relevant part that the State withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense in violation of Brady v. Maryland. The Supreme Court denied the petition, holding (1) Petitioner did not meet his burden of demonstrating a ground for the writ; and (2) Petitioner did not establish that he exercised due diligence in bringing forth his claims for relief. View "Patrick v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of capital murder and sentenced to death. The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's conviction and sentence. Later, Defendant petitioned the Supreme Court to reinvest jurisdiction in the circuit court to allow him to seek a writ of error coram nobis, alleging that he was incompetent at the time of trial and that the prosecutor had withheld exculpatory evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland. The Court granted Defendant permission to pursue coram nobis relief on both grounds. The circuit court denied the petition for writ of error coram nobis, finding that Defendant had been competent to stand trial and that the prosecution did not fail to disclose exculpatory evidence. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the circuit court abused its discretion in denying Defendant’s petition where the record illustrated that Defendant’s cognitive deficits and mental illnesses interfered with his ability to effectively and rationally assist counsel. Remanded for a new trial. View "Newman v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Petitioner was found guilty of several offenses, including rape and kidnapping. The court of appeals affirmed. Petitioner subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief, which was denied. Thereafter, Petitioner filed a petition and an amended petition requesting that the Supreme Court reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court so that he could proceed with a petition for writ of coram nobis. The Supreme Court denied the petition and amended petition and declared the motions filed in connection with the petitions moot, holding that Petitioner’s allegations did not warrant issuance of a writ of error coram nobis. View "Hooper v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant was convicted of premeditated and deliberated capital murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The Supreme Court affirmed. Appellant subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37, alleging that his trial attorney provided ineffective assistance. The circuit court denied the petition after an evidentiary hearing. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) Appellant failed to meet his burden of establishing that he was entitled to appointment of counsel in his postconviction proceedings; and (2) the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying Appellant’s motion to file an enlarged petition. View "Evans v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Appellant was found guilty of capital murder and aggravated robbery. Appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. On appeal, Appellant argued that the trial court erred when it admitted into evidence an out-of-court statement by a witness to a police detective. The Supreme Court affirmed. Appellant subsequently filed a pro se petition for relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel due, in part, to trial counsel’s failure to confront the witness in cross-examination. The Supreme Court dismissed Appellant’s appeal and mooted the motions Appellant filed in connection with the appeal, holding that Appellant failed to demonstrate that counsel provided ineffective assistance. View "Davis v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant filed a motion for rule on clerk to have his appeal docketed. The clerk refused to docket the appeal because the order of the circuit court granting an extension of time to lodge the record on appeal did not contain the findings required by Ark. R. App. P.-Civ. 5(b)(1). The Supreme Court remanded the matter to the circuit court for compliance with Rule 5(b)(1), holding that because the circuit court’s order contained none of the findings required by Rule 5(b)(1), the matter must be remanded for compliance with the rule. View "Coleman v. Strom" on Justia Law

After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of capital murder, attempted capital murder, and possession of a controlled substance. Defendant was sentenced to death for the murder conviction. The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant’s convictions and sentences, holding that the circuit court did not commit reversible error by (1) allowing the State to present evidence of bad acts and bad character; (2) admitting two photographs of a large tattoo on Defendant’s back; (3) permitting repeated showings of dash-camera videos depicting the crimes as they took place; (4) failing to sequester victim-impact witnesses during the guilt phase of trial; (5) overruling Defendant’s objection to a comment the prosecuting attorney made at the sentencing phase of trial; and (6) denying Defendant’s motion to prohibit the State from seeking or imposing the death penalty. View "Lard v. State" on Justia Law

After a jury trial in 2006, Appellant was convicted of capital murder, aggravated robbery, attempted arson, and theft of property. Appellant was sentenced to an aggregate term of life imprisonment without parole plus 636 years. In 2013, Appellant filed a pro se motion for a new sentencing hearing, asserting that her trial counsel erred by not informing her of a plea bargain offered by the prosecution until after she had been convicted. The trial court denied the motion. The Supreme Court affirmed on the basis that the petition was not timely filed, and therefore, the trial court had no jurisdiction to grant the relief sought. View "Young v. State" on Justia Law

Appellants filed complaints alleging claims for malpractice and wrongful death against Appellees Dr. Jeffrey Kirchner, Arkansas Health Group, Baptist Health, and Baptist MedCare, Inc. for medical injury and the wrongful death of Alfred Spires. The circuit court dismissed Appellants' complaint with prejudice. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the circuit court did not err by (1) granting judgment in favor of Appellees before the completion of discovery; (2) dismissing the complaint against Kirchner for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted; and (3) dismissing the complaint against Arkansas Health, Baptist Health, and Baptist MedCare on the ground that Appellants' claims were barred by the statute of limitations. View "Worden v. Kirchner" on Justia Law