Get above the noise
Log in for answers tailored to you — saved chats, your topics, and the full IJR suite.
Judge, Court of Appeals of Arkansas
Griffin v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs.
Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2017-11-29 · cited 8×
In Griffin v. Arkansas Department of Human Services, the Arkansas Court of Appeals reviewed a no-merit appeal from the Pope County Circuit Court’s order terminating Crystal Griffin’s parental rights to her two young children. The children had been removed from Griffin’s custody after being found with serious injuries, and the circuit court had adjudicated them dependent-neglected due to Griffin’s drug use and failure to protect them; over the following months, Griffin completed inpatient treatment but continued to test positive for methamphetamine and amphetamines, failed to maintain stable housing, and attended only about half of her scheduled visits. The circuit court terminated Griffin’s rights on multiple statutory grounds, including twelve-month failure to remedy the conditions causing removal, and found termination was in the children’s best interest based on their adoptability and the risk of harm if returned to her. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the circuit court’s findings were supported by clear and convincing evidence and were not clearly erroneous under de novo review. The court granted counsel’s motion to withdraw, noting no meritorious issues existed for appeal.
family law
Grindstaff v. Strickland
Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2017-11-29 · cited 10×
In this child-custody modification case, Kimberly Grindstaff (formerly Strickland), who had primary custody of the couple’s two minor children after the 2014 divorce, appealed the Benton County Circuit Court’s order transferring custody to Joseph Strickland. The trial court found a material change in circumstances based on the cumulative evidence of Grindstaff’s alienation of the children, failure to communicate about school and activities, violations of the non-cohabitation and joint-decision provisions, and other conduct, and it concluded that an immediate change of custody was in the children’s best interest; it also held Grindstaff in contempt while dismissing her counter-contempt claims. On de novo review, the Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the trial court’s findings were not clearly erroneous, that the noncustodial parent need not show an adverse impact on the children to establish a material change, and that a court is not required to exercise its contempt powers before modifying custody.
family law
Rickman v. Arkansas Department of Human Services
Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2017-11-15 · cited 1×
In this case, Sherry Rickman appealed a Crittenden County Circuit Court order granting the Arkansas Department of Human Services’ motion to cease reunification services with her child K.R., who had been removed from her custody in 2014 due to the mother’s illegal drug use and adjudicated dependent-neglected. The circuit court found by clear and convincing evidence that aggravated circumstances existed, specifically that there was little likelihood further services would lead to successful reunification, and it was in the child’s best interest to end those efforts. The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the evidence supported findings of ongoing instability, including significant ongoing issues with trash and clutter in the home creating unsafe conditions, Rickman’s continued relationship with an abusive partner who had substance issues, repeated positive drug tests for amphetamines despite prior treatment, and mental health concerns, despite over three years of services provided by DHS. The court noted that Rickman had received multiple evaluations, counseling, parenting classes, and drug screens, yet the problems persisted without resolution.
family law
Dawson v. Dawson
Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2017-11-08
In this probate case, Luetta Dawson, widow of Ray H. Dawson, appealed from a Phillips County Circuit Court order that vacated its earlier rulings reopening her late husband's estate and distributing a newly discovered LLC asset to her. The estate had been opened in 2007, published notices issued, and claims filed, but it was dismissed in 2011 under Arkansas Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for prolonged inactivity with no further action until the 2016 reopening petition. The Court of Appeals affirmed the vacation, holding that the probate court lacked jurisdiction because the estate had been dismissed rather than settled and the personal representative discharged, so the reopening statute (Ark. Code Ann. § 28-53-119) did not apply; the five-year limitations period for probate had also expired without proper service or administration. The court noted that Luetta had not timely appealed or challenged the 2011 dismissal.
family lawpropertyprocedure
Hanley v. State
Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2017-11-08
David Hanley entered a no-contest plea to five felonies—robbery, aggravated residential burglary, terroristic threatening, theft of property, and possession of firearms by certain persons—in Jefferson County Circuit Court case 35CR-14-119-1, receiving a 180-month prison sentence and 31 days of jail-time credit in an October 2016 sentencing order. He appealed the order and a later denial of his motion for additional credit, arguing he should receive 394 more days for the period from his February 2014 arrest until his March 2015 sentencing on separate charges in other cases. The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed, finding that Hanley had already been credited with 420 days of jail time on his sentences for the subsequent charges and probation revocations. The court held that Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-4-404 limits credit to time in custody for the specific conduct resulting in each sentence, and applying the overlapping period to both would constitute impermissible double counting, as established in precedents such as Jones v. State and Humphrey v. State.
criminal law
Pledger v. State
Court of Appeals of Arkansas · 2017-11-01
In this case, Craig Allen Pledger was convicted by a jury in Franklin County Circuit Court of commercial burglary, breaking or entering, and theft of property. He appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by denying his motion in limine and ruling that the State could impeach his credibility with his prior felony conviction for failing to register as a sex offender under Arkansas Rule of Evidence 609(a)(2). The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions without addressing the merits of his claim. The court held that the argument was not preserved for appellate review because Pledger did not testify at trial, so the prior conviction was never introduced. Under controlling precedent, a defendant must take the stand to raise and preserve a claim of improper impeachment with a prior conviction.
criminal lawprocedure