 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Bauswell v. State, No. CACR99-345,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, January 5, 2000, Opinion Delivered and Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not err in refusing to allow defendant to put on evidence that he was gullible, because defendant's failure to adduce such testimony was a matter of trial strategy not subject to a claim of error on appeal.
|
|||||
| McGowan v. State, No. CACR 99-444,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, January 5, 2000, Opinion Delivered and Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Considering officers' testimony about the guns found near appellant and his property and appellant's own admission, the revocation of appellant's probation was not clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.
|
|||||
| Moore v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., CA 99-441,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 5, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because mother failed to provide a home for daughters, was unable to parent after three years of rehabilitative services, and caseworker recommended termination, mother's parental rights were terminated.
|
|||||
| Newberry v. State, No. CACR99-425,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, January 5, 2000, Opinion Delivered and Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ofunwa v. State, No. CACR99-532,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, January 5, 2000, Opinion Delivered and Rendered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was appropriate for the trial court to revoke defendant's probation because the trial court had records establishing that defendant had pled guilty to crimes that violated the terms of her probation.
|
|||||
| SWEENEY v. STATE, CACR99-206,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, January 5, 2000, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel's motion withdraw was denied because counsel failed to comply with Anders standard and matter was remanded for rebriefing on the sufficiency of the evidence issue because a directed verdict motion was not required to preserve the issue.
|
|||||
| Sweeney v. State, CA CR 99-206,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, January 5, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: At the time of defendant's trial a directed verdict motion was not required to preserve sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenges for appellate review, and counsel's motion to withdraw was remanded for rebriefing on the issue.
|
|||||
| Watts v. State, CA CR 98-640,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, January 5, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pro se appellant was held to same standard as represented party with respect to requirement that objections must be on record to preserve issues for appeal, and two delays were excludable from speedy trial tolling period.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
