 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Washington v. State, No. CACR 99-1082,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, April 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant failed to show that he was prejudiced by the admission of the testimony regarding the theft, the revocation of appellant's suspended sentence due to several violations of the conditions was affirmed.
|
|||||
| Whisenhunt v. State, No. CACR99-981,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, April 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to support drug convictions; hearsay testimony that appellant's wife pointed to place where appellant kept drug paraphernalia was harmless, and court did not err in denying motion for mistrial.
|
|||||
| Wilcox v. State, CA CR 99-861,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, April 26, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Grant of new trial based on newly discovered evidence was not justification for motion for dismissal or acquittal under double jeopardy argument.
|
|||||
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. |
