Smith v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseAppellant entered a negotiated plea of guilty of aggravated robbery, theft of property, furnishing a prohibited article, and third-degree battery. Appellant later filed a pro se petition for postconviction relief pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.1, arguing that he was denied effective assistance of trial counsel. The trial court denied relief. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that Appellant’s Rule 37.1 petition did not state and support with facts a ground on which relief under Rule 37.1 could be properly granted, and therefore, the trial court did not err in declining to vacate the judgment under the Rule.
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.