Berks v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseAppellant was convicted of second-degree murder and aggravated robbery. The trial court sentenced Appellant to consecutive sentences of thirty years’ imprisonment for each of the charges. Appellant subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1. The trial court denied the petition. Thereafter, Appellant filed a motion seeking that the order be modified to include omitted issues. The trial court denied the motion, concluding that the order had sufficiently addressed the issues. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court’s order was not inadequate under Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.3(a); (2) the trial court did not clearly err in denying relief on Appellant’s claim that counsel was ineffective for counseling him to reject a plea offer; and (3) the trial court did not misconstrue Appellant’s claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to utilize Appellant’s alleged mental defect and disease at trial.
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.