Summary
The Supreme Court of Arkansas dismissed Chariell Ali Glaze’s appeal from the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition and held that his motion for an extension of time to file his brief was moot. The court concluded that Glaze’s challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence underlying his felon-in-possession conviction did not establish a jurisdictional defect or facial invalidity of the judgment, and therefore could not support habeas relief.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Glaze's challenges to the sufficiency and validity of the underlying felony convictions stated a cognizable basis for habeas corpus relief.
- Whether the appeal from the dismissal of the habeas petition should proceed when the record showed that Glaze could not prevail.
- Whether Glaze's motion for an extension of time to file his brief-in-chief remained justiciable after dismissal of the appeal.
Holdings
- An appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief, including habeas relief, will not be permitted to proceed when it is clear from the record that the appeal is without merit.
- A writ of habeas corpus is available only when the judgment of conviction is invalid on its face or the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the cause; challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence or alleged trial errors do not, by themselves, establish either ground.
- The motion for an extension of time to file the brief-in-chief was moot after the appeal was dismissed.
Key quotations
“A writ of habeas corpus is proper only when a judgment of conviction is invalid on its face or when a trial court lacked jurisdiction over the cause.” (at 2)
“However, a habeas-corpus proceeding does not afford a prisoner an opportunity to retry his case, and it is not a substitute for direct appeal or postconviction relief.” (at 3)
Factual background
Glaze was convicted by a jury of being a felon in possession of a firearm and was sentenced as a habitual offender. After the conviction was affirmed and the case was remanded for resentencing, he received a 216-month sentence. While incarcerated, he filed a habeas petition challenging the legality and evidentiary sufficiency of the underlying felony convictions that supported his status as a felon. The circuit court dismissed the petition.
Procedural history
A jury convicted Glaze of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The Arkansas Supreme Court previously affirmed the conviction but remanded for resentencing, after which the circuit court entered a new sentencing order imposing 216 months' imprisonment. Glaze later filed a habeas petition challenging the validity and evidentiary support of the underlying felony convictions, and the Lincoln County Circuit Court dismissed the petition. He appealed that dismissal and sought additional time to file his brief.