 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Henderson v. State, CACR02-146,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant failed to make a specific motion for a directed verdict which advised the trial court of the exact element of the crime that the State failed to prove, defendant's sufficiency challenge was not properly preserved for appeal.
|
|||||
| Holland v. Lefler, CA 02-342,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 22, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in denying a husband's and wife's motion for an extension of time to serve process that was made after the 120-day period for service had expired.
|
|||||
| Phillips v. State, CACR02-455,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, January 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's decision to revoke defendant's probation, for committing the offenses of aggravated robbery and burglary and failing to report to his probation officer, was affirmed where it was not clearly against the preponderance of the evidence.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Smith, CA 02-646,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, January 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeals court held it was without jurisdiction to hear mother's appeal since trial court's order denying her motion to modify the father's visitation was not final. The order reflected that issues of contempt and change of custody were still pending.
|
|||||
| Tolbert v. State, CACR02-500,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, January 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress testimony regarding his inculpatory statement; the appellate court could not say trial judge erred in choosing to believe testimony of police officers rather than that of defendant.
|
|||||
| Troup v. State, CA CR 02-376,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, January 22, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Since appellant's probation period expired without him having been arrested for a probation violation and without an arrest warrant having been issued for violation of probation, the circuit court had no jurisdiction to extend his probation.
|
|||||
| Vestal v. Lawson, CA02-529,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Giving deference to the trial judge's superior position to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's order that changed custody of the parties' son from the mother to the father.
|
|||||
| Wright v. State, CACR02-138,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, January 22, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court's order revoking defendant's probation was affirmed; defendant's appeal was without merit.
|
|||||
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. |
