 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Allen v. State, No. CACR99-676,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because there was sufficient evidence to support appellant's convictions of leaving the scene of an accident with injury and driving on a suspended license, denial of appellant's directed-verdict motion was proper.
|
|||||
| Armstrong v. Watts, No. CA99-110,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant was denied contest of her late mother's will where the will was properly executed, with sufficient testamentary capacity and a lack of undue influence.
|
|||||
| Bolte v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., No. CA 99-533,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Despite human services agency's meaningful but unsuccessful rehabilitative efforts, mother lacked parenting skills necessary to deal with special needs of her children and termination of parental rights was thus warranted.
|
|||||
| Boston v. State, CA CR 99-605,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, February 16, 2000, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A reversal of defendant's conviction for possession of a controlled substance was warranted where the state failed to demonstrate his knowledge of the contents of the container.
|
|||||
| Bussell v. Burlington Indus., No. CA99-646,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When substantial evidence supported finding that pain onset was a natural and probable result of claimant's prior injury rather than a new or aggravated injury, his employers were not liable for related medical expenses.
|
|||||
| Carr v. State, No. CACR99-815,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was substantial evidence to support conviction for possession of firearm by a felon where a gun was found in defendant's car and jury evidently found defendant's various explanations not credible.
|
|||||
| Farwell v. State, No. CACR99-931,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a criminal appeal, possible presence of methamphetamine in victim's system did not, without more information, imply that his testimony was not credible. Thus, court did not abuse its discretion in excluding that testimony.
|
|||||
| Green v. State, No. CACR99-142,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court affirmed conviction for violation of a minor in the first degree. Child victim testified that defendant sexually molested her, and defendant admitted as much in the taped conversations.
|
|||||
| Johnston v. Stevenson-Schulte, No. CA99-805,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Probate judge's order redistributing estate property was reversed where such action was taken based on erroneous determination that an ambiguity in decedent's will existed.
|
|||||
| Martin v. State, No. CACR 99-582,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, February 16, 2000, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's finding appellant had violated terms of his suspended sentences was supported by a preponderance of the evidence, including harmless hearsay; where no sentences had ever been imposed, they could be consecutive.
|
|||||
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. |
