LexisNexis
  
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.


   State Courts - Arkansas - April 5, 2001

  
B.C. v. State, 00-1439, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free  

Overview: Fifteen-year-old juvenile defendant did not have the right to assert the defense of insanity to disorderly conduct charge because there was no statutory authority conferring such a right on juveniles.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Byndom v. State, CR 00-59, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free  

Overview: Because appellant's objections to use of disabled victim's voice computer caused its exclusion at trial, and because even without use of computer victim was still competent to testify, court affirmed appellant's rape conviction.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Davis v. State, CR 01-57, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Appellate court directed its clerk to provide appellant with copy of trial transcript and postconviction appeal record so that he could prepare his brief and granted his motion for extension of time to file his brief.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Emery v. State, CR 01-49, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Defendant did not timely lodge appellate record or partial record with certiorari petition to complete record, so he did not pursue available course or show good cause for failure to perfect appeal, and motion to proceed with appeal was denied.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Fewell v. Pickens, 00-1279; 00-1272, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free  

Overview: Upon entering agreements that were intended to make insurance company appear to be solvent, parties consented to appointment of receiver without prior notice. Immediate entry of receivership order did not violate due process.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Gipson v. State, CR 00-1246, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Decided
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Hawthone v. Langley, CR 01-144, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Decided
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Jacks v. State, CR 01-291, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Decided
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Jacks v. State, CR 01-291, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Nelson v. State, CR 99-634, SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, April 5, 2001, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free  

Overview: Counsel was not ineffective for refraining to call certain witnesses where their testimony would not have changed outcome, nor was he ineffective for failing to present blood evidence when jury could convict for first-degree murder without it.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
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.