5 Arkansas opinions name it 1 courts 1985–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arkansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Rowe v. Stategreen2 sentences2001Other grounds that we have held are so fundamental that a breach renders a judgment a complete nullity and therefore can be addressed under Rule 37 include the following: (1) a trial by a jury of fewer than twelve persons, see Collins v. State, 324 Ark. 322 , 920 S.W.2d 846 (1996); (2) a judgment obtained in a court without jurisdiction to try the accused, see Travis v. State, 286 Ark. 26 , 688 S.W.2d 935 (1985) (citing Rowe v. State, 275 Ark. 37 , 627 S.W.2d 16 (1982)); and a judgment obtained in violation of the constitutional provisions against double jeopardy. 2001Other grounds that we have held are so fundamental that a breach renders a judgment a complete nullity and therefore can be addressed under Rule 37 include the following: (1) a trial by a jury of fewer than twelve persons, see Collins v. State, 324 Ark. 322 , 920 S.W.2d 846 (1996); (2) a judgment obtained in a court without jurisdiction to try the accused, see Travis v. State, 286 Ark. 26 , 688 S.W.2d 935 (1985) (citing Rowe v. State, 275 Ark. 37 , 627 S.W.2d 16 (1982)); and a judgment obtained in violation of the constitutional provisions against double jeopardy. | 1 | 2 |
Sasser v. Stategreen1 sentence2001See id. at 383-384, 993 S.W.2d 901 ; Collins v. State, 324 Ark. 322 , 920 S.W.2d 846 (1996) (trial by a jury of fewer than twelve persons where defendant did not waive a twelve-person jury is fundamental error as to render the judgment of conviction void and subject to collateral attack); Travis v. State, 286 Ark. 26 , 688 S.W.2d 935 (a judgment obtained in violation of the constitutional provisions against double jeopardy is sufficient to void a conviction). [1] Williams's constitutional questions in the present case do not raise "structural" errors or issues sufficient to render the sentence | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Travis v. State
green
2 sentences2001See id. at 383-384, 993 S.W.2d 901 ; Collins v. State, 324 Ark. 322 , 920 S.W.2d 846 (1996) (trial by a jury of fewer than twelve persons where defendant did not waive a twelve-person jury is fundamental error as to render the judgment of conviction void and subject to collateral attack); Travis v. State, 286 Ark. 26 , 688 S.W.2d 935 (a judgment obtained in violation of the constitutional provisions against double jeopardy is sufficient to void a conviction). [1] Williams's constitutional questions in the present case do not raise "structural" errors or issues sufficient to render the sentence 2001See id. at 383-384, 993 S.W.2d 901 ; Collins v. State, 324 Ark. 322 , 920 S.W.2d 846 (1996) (trial by a jury of fewer than twelve persons where defendant did not waive a twelve-person jury is fundamental error as to render the judgment of conviction void and subject to collateral attack); Travis v. State, 286 Ark. 26 , 688 S.W.2d 935 (a judgment obtained in violation of the constitutional provisions against double jeopardy is sufficient to void a conviction). [1] Williams's constitutional questions in the present case do not raise "structural" errors or issues sufficient to render the sentence | 4 | 1988–2018 |
Collins v. State
green
2 sentences2001See id. at 383-384, 993 S.W.2d 901 ; Collins v. State, 324 Ark. 322 , 920 S.W.2d 846 (1996) (trial by a jury of fewer than twelve persons where defendant did not waive a twelve-person jury is fundamental error as to render the judgment of conviction void and subject to collateral attack); Travis v. State, 286 Ark. 26 , 688 S.W.2d 935 (a judgment obtained in violation of the constitutional provisions against double jeopardy is sufficient to void a conviction). [1] Williams's constitutional questions in the present case do not raise "structural" errors or issues sufficient to render the sentence 2001See id. at 383-384, 993 S.W.2d 901 ; Collins v. State, 324 Ark. 322 , 920 S.W.2d 846 (1996) (trial by a jury of fewer than twelve persons where defendant did not waive a twelve-person jury is fundamental error as to render the judgment of conviction void and subject to collateral attack); Travis v. State, 286 Ark. 26 , 688 S.W.2d 935 (a judgment obtained in violation of the constitutional provisions against double jeopardy is sufficient to void a conviction). [1] Williams's constitutional questions in the present case do not raise "structural" errors or issues sufficient to render the sentence | 2 | 2001–2001 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.