 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Luster v. State, CACR 04-979,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 23, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant discarded one tobacco cigarette laced with PCP when the officer arrived and another was found in his coat pocket, the State presented sufficient evidence that he knowingly possessed the substance in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-401 (Repl. 1997). The trial court did not err in denying his directed-verdict motions.
|
|||||
| Mata v. State, CACR 04-917,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 23, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the computer defendant possessed matched the serial number for the computer taken from a department store and he gave conflicting statements as to how he acquired the computer, the evidence showed he committed the offense of theft by receiving under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-36-106 (Supp. 2003). The judge properly revoked his suspended sentence.
|
|||||
| Moore v. State, CACR04-894,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 23, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to sustain the revocation of defendant's suspended sentence where a clerk testified that defendant robbed her store with what appeared to be a gun, and defendant confessed to robbing the store with an air pistol and taking approximately seventy-five dollars.
|
|||||
| Moore v. Wallace, CA 04-191,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISIONS ONE AND TWO, March 23, 2005, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of owners' breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims was proper where owners were obligated to the bank pursuant to either the promissory note or guaranty agreement; bank was entitled to insurance proceeds. Bank's receipt to that which it was entitled could not serve as basis for asserting fraud or estoppel.
|
|||||
| Rogers v. Rogers, CA 03-1411,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 23, 2005, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arkansas residency requirement of Ark. Code Ann. § § 9-12-306(c)(1) (2002) was based, inter alia, on corroboration by wife's daughter's testimony that the wife had lived in Benton County, Arkansas, for 3 months preceding divorce hearing and, on remand, daughter testified wife had been resident of county for 9 or 10 years before filing for divorce.
|
|||||
| Spivey v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., CA 04-489,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION ONE, March 23, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of parental rights under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B) (Supp. 2003) was appropriate where the evidence showed that parents failed to remedy the following conditions: the parents tested positive for drugs, they were unable to maintain employment, their house was infested with bugs, and it had no utilities.
|
|||||
| St. Edward Mercy Med. Ctr. v. Clark, CA04-1067,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 23, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A decision that treatment for a back injury was reasonable and necessary under Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-508(a) (Supp. 2003) was reversed and remanded because the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission did not consider other medical testimony to the contrary; the Commission was not allowed to arbitrarily disregard witness testimony.
|
|||||
| Syrock v. State, CACR04-883,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION TWO, March 23, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a drug case involving possession with an intent to deliver, evidence of a prior delivery five minutes before an arrest was admissible under Ark. R. Evid. 404(b) (2004) to show intent. Defendant argued that the drugs found were merely for his personal use.
|
|||||
| Wade v. State, CACR04-453,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION THREE, March 23, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a drug case, officers did not violate the Fourth Amendment's knock and announce rule by entering a residence twenty seconds after knocking because that amount of time was sufficient. Further, the fact that a wife was present during drug transactions and lived in the same house was sufficient to show constructive possession.
|
|||||
| Washington v. State, CACR04-693,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS, DIVISION FOUR, March 23, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment forfeiting two vehicles, tires, and rims under Ark. Code Ann. § 5-64-505 was reversed where, while there were several bags of marijuana found in a truck's bed, there was no evidence that the truck was used for transporting those drugs, and there was even less evidence that a car was subject to forfeiture because no drugs were found in it.
|
|||||
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. |
