Summary
The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the denial of Elvis Thacker’s petition for a writ of error coram nobis. The court held that undisclosed police videos were not material to Thacker’s self-defense or suppression arguments and that his allegations of a coerced guilty plea were insufficient and untimely. The court also declined to review his actual-innocence claim because the circuit court had not ruled on it; two justices dissented regarding the need for an evidentiary hearing.
Holdings
- The circuit court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that neither video was material to the Arkansas charges or sufficient to establish a Brady violation. The Taser video was only a limited recording of events immediately before entry, and the body-camera video was recorded after the arrest-related events and concerned statements relating to the Oklahoma investigation.
- The circuit court did not abuse its discretion by denying coram nobis relief on the coerced-plea claim because the allegations were unsubstantiated, contradicted by the evidence, noncognizable in coram nobis proceedings, or brought after an unjustified four-year delay.
- The actual-innocence claim was not reviewable because the circuit court did not rule on it.
- The majority affirmed the denial without a hearing, concluding that Thacker had not developed the argument or provided appropriate authority; the dissent disagreed and would have required a hearing because the petition was not clearly meritless.
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by denying coram nobis relief based on allegedly suppressed video evidence under Brady v. Maryland.
- Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by denying coram nobis relief based on an allegedly coerced guilty plea.
- Whether the court could review Thacker's actual-innocence claim when the circuit court had not ruled on that issue.
- Whether the circuit court erred by denying the coram nobis petition without a hearing.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (16)
- Perry v. State, 2014 Ark. 535, 453 S.W.3d 650(followed)
- Thacker v. State, 2012 Ark. 205(cited)
- State v. Larimore, 341 Ark. 397, 17 S.W.3d 87 (2000)(followed)
- State v. Tejeda-Acosta, 2013 Ark. 217, 427 S.W.3d 673(followed)
- Grant v. State, 2010 Ark. 286, 365 S.W.3d 894(followed)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)(followed)
- Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (1999)(followed)
- United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985)(followed)
- Barker v. State, 2010 Ark. 354, 373 S.W.3d 865(followed)
- Ventress v. State, 2015 Ark. 181, 461 S.W.3d 313(followed)
Showing top 10 of 16.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…