 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ark. Bev. Retailers Ass'n v. Moore, No. 06-794,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A liquor store retailers' association had standing under Ark. Code Ann. § 25-15-212(a) to challenge a decision of the alcoholic beverage control board, which granted permits to a store, based on the association's claims of disparate treatment under Ark. Code Ann. § 3-4-218 and its members' inability to compete on an equal basis with the store.
|
|||||
| Brewton v. State, No. CR07-330,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Bunch v. State, No. CR 06-1384,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Dukes v. Norris, No. 06-829,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate was not denied equal protection where he alleged that the prison failed to purchase electronic monitoring devices because the prison had not approved, and was not required to approve, inmates serving life sentences for meritorious furlough; therefore, the prisoner did not show that he had a potential liberty interest in a furlough.
|
|||||
| Finch v. State, No. CR 07-263,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where no appeal was taken from the judgment of conviction, petitioner sought to proceed with a belated appeal pursuant to Ark. R. App. P. Crim. 2(e). The state supreme court remanded the case to the trial court to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether petitioner timely informed counsel of his desire to appeal.
|
|||||
| Grant v. State, No. CR 07-224,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant sought to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction in a criminal case, he was not entitled to pursue mandamus relief or an action for declaratory judgment. A mandamus action was not a substitute for a criminal appeal.
|
|||||
| Harrison v. State , No. CR07-357,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Hill v. State, Nos. 07-280,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where petitioner claimed his convictions for aggravated robbery and theft of property resulted from a mistaken identification and that police conduct denied him his right to counsel and a fair trial, he was not entitled to a writ of habeas corpus under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-112-103. There was no good cause to allow him to file a belated appeal.
|
|||||
| McClendon v. Humphrey, No. CR 06-916,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 3, 2007, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
