 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Branscumb v. Freeman, 04-147,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant seeking review of the dismissal of claims against a motorcycle owner included only the order of dismissal in the addendum, the deficiency in the appellate record prevented a review on the merits without a timely supplementation.
|
|||||
| Carter v. State, CR 03-131,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's petition for postconviction relief alleging ineffective assistance was properly denied. Defendant clearly acted in concert with other persons in violent crime, and counsel was not ineffective in failing to object to instruction thereon.
|
|||||
| Crosser v. Henson, 04-198,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a custody modification case, a court erred by applying the wrong standard where it believed that the natural-parent preference was binding because that was not the absolute determinant in custody-modification matters.
|
|||||
| Dodson v. State, CR 02-878,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Opinion delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's addendum on appeal was insufficient for review where it lacked the judgment and commitment order that were at issue, the notice of appeal, or copies of prior convictions that he argued were improperly used to enhance his sentence.
|
|||||
| Hendrickson-Atkinson v. State, CR 02-1037,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's petition for postconviction relief was properly denied, where it was based on the trial court's failure to answer jury query in open court, an issue that was addressed on direct appeal and found not to be prejudicial under the circumstances.
|
|||||
| Hunter v. State, CR 04-432,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Client Sec. Fund Comm., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| McBride v. State, CR 04-570,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Opinion Delivered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Munson v. State, CR 04-423,
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS, June 10, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate's request for the appointment of counsel to represent him in an appeal from the denial of his petition for postconviction relief was denied, where the inmate made only conclusory statements that the appeal was meritorious.
|
|||||
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. |
