 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Burns v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., CA 06-588,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the evidence showed that a mother had a serious mental illness, she abandoned her child, and she failed to cooperate with treatment, failed to take drug screens, and failed to maintain stable and adequate housing, the termination of her parental rights under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3) was upheld.
|
|||||
| Drummond v. Shepherd, No. CA06-438,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Neighboring landowner brought a suit asserting a right-of-use easement on a gravel drive across property owners' property; however, trial court did not err in granting motion to dismiss, pursuant to Ark. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), because landowner did not introduce evidence of use prior to 2002, and once he was told to stop using the drive, he did.
|
|||||
| Edwards v. State, CACR06-326,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Garver v. State, CACR05-762,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In revocation of defendant's probation, evidence was sufficient to support revocation because defendant admitted that defendant would fail a drug test and arresting officer found defendant in possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. Moreover, defendant did not need to receive Miranda warnings for statements to be admissible.
|
|||||
| Hayes v. State, CACR 06-528,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, January 24, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion for a directed verdict was properly denied in a case involving second-degree battery under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-13-202(a)(4)(C) because the evidence showed that defendant caused a child's injuries knowingly or intentionally since defendant admitted to the act, and the medical evidence showed the child was injured while in a defensive posture.
|
|||||
| McJunkins v. State, CACR06-78,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, January 24, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Medling v. State, CACR 05-1015,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, January 24, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in deciding to revoke defendant's probation because defendant failed to comply with the terms of her probation by failing to pay fines and failing to report to her probation officer. The trial court was the determiner of defendant's credibility.
|
|||||
| Ryan v. State, CACR06-198,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case involving domestic battering in the first degree, an issue regarding the sufficiency of the evidence was not preserved for review because a motion to dismiss was not made at the close of the evidence, as required by Ark. R. Crim. P. 33.1(b). Moreover, a 10-year sentence imposed with a 2-year enhancement was appropriate.
|
|||||
| Short v. Freeman, CA06-240,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, January 24, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a malicious prosecution case against a landlord, a $250,000 punitive damages award was not excessive and complied with due process because the landlord approached prosecutors with knowledge that the tenant had actually paid the rent, the tenant was publicly arrested and spent time in jail, and the tenant's sick mother had to bail her out.
|
|||||
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. |
