 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Barnett v. State, No. CR 05-1179,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed the denial of an inmate's motion to vacate because in reviewing the lengthy colloquy between the court and the inmate, it was evident that expungement was not part of the inmate's plea agreement. Moreover, there was no right to expungement under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-93-303(a)(3).
|
|||||
| Bullock v. Barnes, No. 06-97,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit court improperly granted a niece's petition to reopen probate of her aunt's estate under Ark. Code Ann. § 28-53-119(a)(1) because she did not file the petition within the 90-day limitation period set forth in Ark. R. Civ. P. 60(a) and she did not provide "other cause," such as fraud, under Rule 60(c)(4), or lack of notice.
|
|||||
| City of Little Rock v. Hudson, No. 04-1350,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Circuit court's judgment reversing a civil service commission's disciplining of a fireman was affirmed as the court was within its province, in its de novo review under Ark. Code Ann. § 14-51-308(e)(1), in giving credence to the fireman's evidence as to the existence of mints in his mouth during breathalyzer tests and his not being intoxicated.
|
|||||
| Cooper v. State, No. CR 06-487,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the circuit court denied petitioner inmate's request for writ of habeas corpus, he failed to timely file a notice of appeal within thirty-days of the order in accordance with Ark. R. App. P. Civ. 4(a). The state supreme court declined to adopt the mailbox rule.
|
|||||
| Howard v. State, No. CR05-699,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a death penalty case, additional verification of petitioner's request for postconviction relief was necessary because petition was only verified by petitioner's attorney, and it did not comply with Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.5.
|
|||||
| Joyner v. State, No. CR 04-1208,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Ark. R. App. P. Crim. 2(e), defendant's motion for belated appeal was denied where as the petition for writ of certiorari was intended as a second motion for belated appeal, and it did not comport with the prevailing rules of procedure; petition for writ of certiorari was not available to the convicted defendant to circumvent Rule 2(e).
|
|||||
| Myers v. McAdams, No. 05-1309,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an action by the parents of a deceased minor for wrongful death and survival, because a circuit court dismissed the wrongful death claim as time-barred, but did not dispose of the survival claim, the state supreme court had no jurisdiction to hear an appeal because there was no final judgment, as required by Ark. R. App. P. Civ. 2(a)(1).
|
|||||
| Pardue v. Norris, No. 06-335,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Terry v. State, No. CR05-1308,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, May 25, 2006, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court affirmed defendant's conviction for rape of his infant daughter in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 5-14-104(a) because the child showed signs of sexual abuse immediately after being left with defendant and defendant's semen was found on the child's diaper.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
