Engram v. State (Majority)
Annotate this CaseIn 1999, after a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of capital murder and rape and sentenced to death. Counsel was subsequently appointed to represent Appellant in postconviction proceedings. Counsel decided to forgo Ark. R. Crim. P. 37 relief. In 2006, Appellant filed a Rule 37 petition for postconviction relief, asserting allegations of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and that he was mentally retarded and therefore could not be executed. In 2012, the circuit court summarily dismissed the petition as untimely. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that, under the circumstances of this case and considering the punishment at issue, the circuit court erred in summarily dismissing Appellant's Rule 37 petition in the absence of a hearing and specific written findings on the issue of whether good cause existed for the belated filing of the petition. Remanded.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.