Arkansas, February, 2005, State Case law

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!

State Courts - Arkansas - February 9, 2005

Akins v. State, No. CACR03-1234, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 9, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free

Overview: The circuit court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of robbery where, pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. ? 5-2-402(2), defendant was tried as an accomplice; whether he was aware that the two other men were armed was irrelevant. Defendant committed two separate crimes of aggravated robbery and aggravated assault.

Search Cases for Free

Barringer v. Hall, CA 04-353, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 9, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free

Overview: Trial court properly denied home buyers' motion for new trial because jury could have found that sellers did not falsely state there was a septic system knowing they had insufficient information to do so and buyers were not justified in relying on sellers' statement in light of the professional property inspection and sales contract disclaimers.

Search Cases for Free

Bella Vista POA v. Hamilton, CA04-757, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Search Cases for Free

Brown v. Wyatt, CA 04-487, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Divorce proceeding did not preclude husband from litigating consent to artificial insemination issue; however, appellees' conduct was not extreme or outrageous, and husband could not recover the cost of raising children from a doctor and a center.

Search Cases for Free

City of Fort Smith v. Didicom Towers, Inc., CA04-678, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Appellate court could not reach the merits of a zoning case because city's addendum was flagrantly deficient in omitting the petition pretrial motions and numerous other pleadings filed in the action, such as city planning commission proceedings.

Search Cases for Free

Etheredge v. State, CACR 04-512, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE AND FOUR, February 9, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free

Overview: The fact that defendant was acquitted of refusal-to-consent charge in municipal court was immaterial. That evidence was admissible where he appealed driving while intoxicated conviction to circuit court as it was relevant to consciousness of guilt.

Search Cases for Free

Gonzalez v. State, CACR03-1436, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Ark. Code Ann. ? 12-12-704 (Repl. 2003), which barred the admissibility of polygraph results, did not abridge defendant's right to present a defense in a criminal prosecution for rape.

Search Cases for Free

Gosa v. Nu-Way Prods. Co., CA04-547, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission was presented with conflicting evidence regarding treatment for employee's low-back injury. Employee had refused to undergo recommended procedure and had other ailments, so additional benefits were denied.

Search Cases for Free

Hiang v. State, CA CR 04-74, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 9, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free

Overview: The appellate court lacked jurisdiction over defendants' untimely appeal of the order denying motions to set aside their guilty pleas.

Search Cases for Free

Jefferson v. State, CACR03-1355, COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 9, 2005, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Where defendant was accused of rape of wife, divorce complaint was hearsay and was offered for the truth of matter asserted: whether the parties were separated at the time. Since wife did not testify, defendant's conviction was reversed.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal