Opinion

Oliver v. State

  • 323 Ark. 743
  • 918 S.W.2d 690
  • 1996 Ark. LEXIS 173
Court
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Filed
Mar 18, 1996
Status
Published
Author
Glaze
On the bench
Brown, Glaze, Dudley, Newbern, Roaf
Cited by
39 cases

“We conclude that fairness dictates a prospective application of our holding. Oliver could justifiably have relied on the cases now overruled.”

How later courts described this case

  • “We conclude that fairness dictates a prospective application of our holding. Oliver could justifiably have relied on the cases now overruled.”
  • fairness dictated prospective application of holding where defendant could justifiably have relied on the cases overruled
  • justifiable reliance in a criminal case

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Glaze, J., concurring. In my view, the appellant voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waived his right to the assistance of counsel. Nonetheless, the trial court still appointed appellant an attorney who effectively represented him at trial. I would affirm for these reasons alone.

Roaf, J., concurs.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.