Justia Arkansas Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Appellant Lee Millsap entered a plea of guilty to multiple offenses and was sentenced to an aggregate term of life imprisonment without parole. Appellant subsequently filed a pro se "third motion for appointment of counsel," contending that he was entitled as an indigent prisoner charged with a capital offense to appointment of an attorney to process a petition for writ of habeas corpus before the circuit court. The trial court denied the motion, and Appellant appealed. Before the Supreme Court were two motions filed by Appellant related to the appeal. The Court dismissed the appeal and declared the motions moot, holding that, as Appellant did not establish that he was entitled to the relief sought, the trial court did not err in denying Appellant's motion. View "Millsap v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant Michael Miller was placed under arrest for the offense of driving while intoxicated. Appellant's driver's license was suspended for six months and his commercial driver's license was disqualified for one year. At an administrative hearing, a hearing officer upheld the suspension of Appellant's driving privileges. Appellant appealed, asserting that his administrative hearing was flawed. The circuit court found (1) the administrative hearing did not violate Appellant's due process right, and therefore, Ark. Code Ann. 5-65-402, which governs the administrative suspension of driver's licenses, was not unconstitutional as applied to Appellant. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that section 5-64-402 was no unconstitutional as applied to Appellant in this case. View "Miller v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs." on Justia Law

Petitioner Greg Hogue was convicted of capital murder. Petitioner subsequently filed a pro se petition for forensics testing, seeking to challenge his conviction through a writ of habeas corpus. The lower court denied the petition. Petitioner subsequently filed a notice of appeal. The Supreme Court clerk declined to lodge the appeal because its tender was untimely. Before the Court was Petitioner's motion seeking to proceed with the appeal and requesting that the Court permit him to lodge the record belatedly. The Court denied the motion, holding that Petitioner did not show good cause for his failure to tender the record within the ninety-day period required by Ark. R. App. P.-Crim 4(b). View "Hogue v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant Michael Gilliland was convicted of the rape and second-degree sexual assault of his fourteen-year-old stepdaughter and was sentenced to life imprisonment. The Supreme Court affirmed Appellant's conviction and sentence. Appellant subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief, arguing that his counsel was ineffective for failing to make specific and timely objections to the State's rebuttal testimony. The circuit court denied the petition. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that because Appellant opened the door to the testimony he found objectionable, the showing of prejudice required under Strickland v. Washington was lacking, and therefore, the circuit court did not err in finding that Appellant's counsel was not ineffective. View "Gilliland v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant Timothy Davis was found guilty by a jury of capital murder and kidnapping with a firearm enhancement. Appellant was sentenced as a habitual offender to an aggregate term of life imprisonment without parole. The Supreme Court affirmed. Appellant subsequently filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Lincoln County circuit court where he was incarcerated. The court dismissed the petition. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal because Appellant had been transferred to Jefferson County after he filed his petition, and therefore, Appellant did not meet the procedural requirements of Act 1780 for a court to issue a writ of habeas corpus. View "Davis v. Hobbs" on Justia Law

Appellant Dustin Vickers was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence. Appellant subsequently filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court of the county in which he was incarcerated, asserting that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction and that the judgment was invalid on its face. The circuit court denied the petition. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that Appellant fell short of establishing that the trial court in his case lacked jurisdiction or that the commitment was invalid on its face, and therefore, there was no basis for a finding that a writ of habeas corpus should issue. View "Vickers v. Norris" on Justia Law

Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Appellant Mario Scott pled nolo contendere to first-degree murder. Appellant subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and asserting that the trial court was without jurisdiction to sentence him because it violated his due-process and Sixth Amendment rights. The circuit court denied the petition without a hearing. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not err in denying relief where (1) Appellant did not establish prejudice based on his counsel's alleged error; (2) Appellant's claim that the trial court was without jurisdiction to impose a sentence following his guilty plea was not cognizable in a petition for postconviction relief; and (3) the trial court did not err in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing on the ineffective-assistance claims. View "Scott v. State" on Justia Law

Appellant Antonio Sartin was tried and convicted by a jury of aggravated robbery and felony theft of property and sentenced as a habitual offender. The court of appeals affirmed Appellant's convictions. Appellant subsequently filed an amended petition for postconviction relief, alleging that his trial counsel was ineffective (1) in failing to pursue the theory of defense that he was guilty only of theft of property and not aggravated robbery, and (2) in not honoring his request to testify in his own behalf. The circuit court denied the petition without holding a hearing. The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief, holding that the circuit court did not clearly err in denying Appellant's petition on either ground asserted. View "Sartin v. State" on Justia Law

A jury found Appellant Vince Greer guilty of internet stalking of a child and sentenced him to sixteen years' imprisonment. The court of appeals affirmed. Appellant subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief in the circuit court, alleging that his defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance. The circuit court denied the petition without a hearing. The Supreme Court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief, holding that the circuit court (1) did not err by denying Appellant's petition without making written findings or conducting a hearing, and (2) did not err in denying Appellant's petition for postconviction relief on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. View "Greer v. State" on Justia Law

Petitioner Lavelle Evans was found guilty by a jury of several drug offenses. Petitioner was sentenced as a habitual offender to an aggregate sentence of 960 months' imprisonment. The court of appeals affirmed. Petitioner subsequently filed with the Supreme Court a pro se petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider a petition for writ of error coram nobis challenging the judgment, alleging that one of the jurors at his trial was biased. The Court denied the relief sought, holding that Petitioner's claim of juror bias was not cognizable as a ground for a writ of error coram nobis. View "Evans v. State" on Justia Law