 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bryan v. Harris, 02-395,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As issues raised in petition for writ of habeas corpus were not sufficient to demonstrate that trial court lacked jurisdiction or that conviction was invalid on its face, defendant failed to demonstrate that writ of habeas corpus should be issued.
|
|||||
| Carter v. Four Seasons Funding Corp., 01-1315,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Purchase agreement expressly contemplated the sale of accounts receivable at a discount; trial court did not err in finding that the parties agreed to a sale, and appellants did not show that the arrangement was a subterfuge for usurious loans.
|
|||||
| Doss v. State, CR 02-599,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant failed to renew her motion for directed verdict following the State's rebuttal, as required by the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure, the appellate court could not consider her sufficiency of the evidence argument on appeal.
|
|||||
| Hardin v. State, CR 02-335,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel's decision not to call witnesses to testify as to rape victim's prior relationship with defendant was not ineffective assistance. It could have opened door to defendant's prior bad acts. Limited cross-examination was also proper strategy.
|
|||||
| Hutcherson v. State, CR 02-373,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Admin. Order, [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Supreme Court Comm. on Crim. Practice, [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lamar v. State, CR 01-909,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of defendant's pro se motion to photocopy or access the transcript lodged on appeal at the publics' cost was proper, where he failed to demonstrate some compelling need for specific documentary evidence.
|
|||||
| Maxwell v. State, CR 03-55,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, February 6, 2003, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
