Ratliff v. Kelley (Majority)
Annotate this Case
The Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s denial of Appellant’s pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus, holding that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Appellant stated insufficient grounds for the writ.
In his writ, Appellant alleged that there was insufficient evidence to support the enhancements to the sentences for prior convictions noted on the judgment of conviction and that he was not competent when the crimes were committed or to stand trial. The circuit court found that Appellant’s petition failed to set forth a basis for the writ. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the circuit court’s application of Philyaw v. Kelley, 477 S.W.3d 503 (Ark. 2015), was not in error; and (2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the grounds in Appellant’s petition did not support the writ.
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.