 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Rucker v. State, No. CR 05-689,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 16, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not clearly err in determining that an inmate failed to meet his burden of proof under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-112-202(c)(1)(B) that retesting of fingerprints found on the murder weapon would identify the prints; the inmate did not show there was any new scientific process or procedure that would lead to new noncumulative evidence.
|
|||||
| Van Buren Sch. Dist. v. Jones, No. 05-861,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 16, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in granting teacher's class certification motion under Ark. R. Civ. P. 23 because there were adequate methods for determining the identity of class members, the class definition was specific enough to prevent it from becoming too unwieldy, and there were common issues as to teachers' uncompensated non-instructional duties.
|
|||||
| Van Carr Enters. v. Hamco, Inc., No. 05-954,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 16, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A contract containing an option to purchase real estate was not void in its entirely based on an usurious interest rate under Ark. Const. art. 19, § 13 (2004) because it was void only as to the unpaid interest under Arkansas law; the act of seeking specific performance did not waive the issue of usury either.
|
|||||
| Wells v. State, No. CR 06-191,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 16, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court denied inmate's motion for leave to file belated appeal of order denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus where notice of appeal was filed six days after 30-day deadline imposed by Ark. R. App. P. Civ. 4(a); fact that he had not received ruling on his motion for appointment of counsel did not excuse his failure to comply with procedure.
|
|||||
| Whitt v. State, No. CR05-1181,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 16, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-12-103 aggravated robbery and Ark. Code Ann. § 5-10-101 capital murder, jury did not have to resort to speculation and conjecture as it apparently believed testimony from defendant's 4 friends concerning his actions and admissions on the night the crimes were committed and next day when he fled.
|
|||||
| Wilson v. State, No. CR05-870,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, March 16, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported defendant's conviction for capital murder, in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-10-101(a)(4), where, pursuant to § 5-2-403(b)(1-2), he served as accomplice by directing his brother to come down from attic because victim moved, suggesting that his brother had to finish killing victim, and he did while defendant watched.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
