Ward v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseAppellant was convicted of the rape of an eleven-year-old girl and sentenced to life imprisonment. Thereafter, Appellant retained counsel, and counsel filed a verified petition pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1, arguing that he did not receive effective assistance of counsel at trial. The trial court denied the petition after a hearing. After the record on appeal was lodged, counsel asked to be relieved, and Appellant moved for new counsel to be appointed to represent him. The Supreme Court granted counsel’s motion to be relieved and denied Appellant’s motion for appointment of another attorney. Appellant subsequently filed a number of pro se motions. The Supreme Court granted in part and denied in part Appellant’s motions for extension of brief time and denied all other motions, as the trial court did not rule on the postconviction issues contained in the motions, the claims contained in the motions were not raised in the Rule 37.1 petition, or the motions were without merit or without a factual basis.
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.