Case law

Thompson v. State

461 S.W.3d 368 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 29, 2015

But Thompson was charged with rape, not violating a minor, and the rape-shield statute clearly applies to a rape charge. … There, the jury commissioners simply went down the list of qualified electors of the county and selected a jury panel from among individuals with whom they were personally acquainted, and because the commissioners were

Shadwick v. State

519 S.W.3d 722 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 19, 2017

As the trial court was finding the jury panel qualified, it read the criminal information which included count two—sex offender failing to register— 4 … Because Shadwick failed to meet his burden of proof on the deficiency prong of the Strickland test, the trial court did not clearly err in denying Rule 37 relief.

Randy W. Duck v. State of Arkansas

596 S.W.3d 571 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 4, 2020

He argues that two particular jurors have close ties with the prosecuting attorney’s office—one with familial ties and the other through employment relations—and consequently were not qualified to serve as jurors. … He fails to provide facts establishing prejudice.

Hendrix v. State

40 Ark. App. 52 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Nov 25, 1992

In the case at bar, the appellant objected prior to the police officer’s testimony and argued, in essence, that a police officer with only two years experience could not under any circumstances be qualified to state an opinion … This objection was overruled by the trial court, and properly so, because there had been no voir dire of the witness to establish his qualifications, or lack of them, at the time this objection was raised.

B.M. v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs.

2015 Ark. App. 283 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 29, 2015

Clear and convincing evidence is defined as that degree of proof that will produce in the fact-finder a firm conviction as to the allegation sought to be established. Dinkins, supra. … On appeal, the appellate court will not reverse the trial court’s ruling unless its findings are clearly erroneous. Id.

Slaughter v. State

69 Ark. App. 65 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jan 26, 2000

Four of the five exceptions listed in section 5-4-103(b) clearly do not apply. … Finally, while the statute clearly defines the top limit for imprisonment on a Class D felony, six years, it does not set forth the lower limit.

Boyd v. General Industries

22 Ark. App. 103 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jul 29, 1987

Clearly the disabling effects of this type of disorder are compensable if the requirement of a causal connection is met. … To summarize, the evidence in this case clearly establishes that: 1. Boyd suffered a compensable but relatively minor back injury in 1980, which has now completely healed. 2.

Thomas Locke v. Arkansas Department of Human Services and Minor Children

608 S.W.3d 612 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Sep 9, 2020

As to housing, Davis explained that Griffin had qualified for HUD housing, but because Locke has a felony conviction, he was not eligible to live in a HUD apartment. … Clear and convincing evidence is proof that will produce in the fact-finder a firm conviction on the allegation sought to be established. Dinkins, supra.

Duchac v. City of Hot Springs

67 Ark. App. 98 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Jun 16, 1999

Anderson had lived in a mobile home on his lot when a zoning ordinance against trailers became effective, so his home qualified as a preexisting, nonconforming use. … Hodges, 330 Ark. 716 , 957 S.W.2d 690 (1997), our supreme court set out the elements of estoppel: Four elements are necessary to establish estoppel.

Vicki Bush v. Bush Machine and Tractor, Inc. Laurence Erwin Bush Ryan Bush And Tory Bush

669 S.W.3d 238 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · May 17, 2023

from an individual account (excluding persons who have the right to withdraw by virtue of a Power of Attorney), the account shall be treated as a joint ownership account (although not necessarily a qualifying … joint account) and shall be insured in accordance with the provisions of § 330.9, unless the deposit account records clearly indicate, to the satisfaction of the FDIC, that the funds are owned by one individual

Hudson v. State

85 Ark. App. 85 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 11, 2004

The rule of statutory construction noted in Whalen is not a constitutional rale requiring courts to negate clearly expressed legislative intent. … Thus, we hold that the reliability of this expert testimony was established.

Bargery v. State

37 Ark. App. 118 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 4, 1992

His statements that he had been stabbed and did not know why clearly referred to the cause and circumstances of his death. … He relies on the well-established rule that evidence of specific acts of violence that were directed at a defendant or were within his knowledge is admissible under Ark. R.

Webb v. Webb

450 S.W.3d 265 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 10, 2014

Other agreed orders and qualifying domestic relations orders (QDROs) concerning the property and assets were also entered. … The evidence also established that appellant, who was fifty-two years old, lived with her stepfather.

Bft Rental, LLC v. Arkansas State Highway Commission

2026 Ark. App. 73 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 4, 2026

Crump was qualified as an expert without objection. He discussed some of the elements of the BFT tract and said, “It is in the path of [ ] what I would consider the future growth of Fayetteville.” … It is well established that the failure to object to some irregularity in a verdict before the discharge of the jury constitutes a waiver of that irregularity. Fisher v.

Sapp v. Phelphs Trucking, Inc.

64 Ark. App. 221 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Dec 16, 1998

The record clearly establishes that appellant is only qualified, based upon his education, skills, and work experience, to perform heavy manual labor. … It is clear that appellant will not be able to secure future employment in the area in which he is qualified.

Gildehaus v. Arkansas Alcoholic Beverage Control Board

486 S.W.3d 216 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Mar 9, 2016

If a petitioner satisfies the injury requirement of this statute, then he or she qualifies for judicial review of agency action. … I cannot say that the Board clearly erred in its interpretation of this statute.

Mark C. Williams v. Amy Minton Williams

599 S.W.3d 137 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 1, 2020

The court also equally divided the assets in the couple’s whole-life insurance policy, retirement accounts, and bank accounts, including the money in the bank account that Amy established for her limited liability company … alleging that Mark disposed of personal property and failed to undergo a court-ordered mental evaluation; and finally, a petition filed February 9, 2019, alleging that Mark failed to pay child support, failed to prepare a qualified

Jag Consulting v. Eubanks

77 Ark. App. 232 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Apr 24, 2002

Appellee was qualified as an expert by the trial court. As such, he could base his opinion on information he gained from others, including other experts. See Phillips v. Graves, 219 Ark. 806 , 245 S.W.2d 394 (1952). … It is only where it clearly appears that there can be no recovery that we consider it proper to dismiss the cause. . . . The evidence might well have been much more developed than it was.

Samuel Gladden v. State of Arkansas

2025 Ark. App. 78 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 12, 2025

The Townsend factors are (1) that the prior act clearly occurred; (2) that the acts closely resembled those of the present case; (3) that the prior act is clearly relevant to a material issue; (4) that the evidence is … The circuit court overruled the objection and held that the testimony qualified as an excited utterance.

Samuel Gladden v. State of Arkansas

2025 Ark. App. 78 · Court of Appeals of Arkansas · Feb 12, 2025

The Townsend factors are (1) that the prior act clearly occurred; (2) that the acts closely resembled those of the present case; (3) that the prior act is clearly relevant to a material issue; (4) that the evidence is … The circuit court overruled the objection and held that the testimony qualified as an excited utterance.