Thompson v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Arkansas denied James Ray Thompson’s pro se petition to reinvest the trial court with jurisdiction to consider a writ of error coram nobis and denied his motion for leave to reply. The court held that the alleged Brady evidence—the victim’s 911 recording—was not suppressed or extrinsic to the record because it was played and admitted at trial, and it did not establish prejudice or a fundamental error warranting coram nobis relief.

Holdings

1. Thompson failed to demonstrate a fundamental error of fact extrinsic to the record that would have prevented rendition of the judgment; therefore, permission to pursue coram nobis relief was denied.
2. Thompson failed to allege facts establishing a meritorious Brady violation because the victim's recorded statement was not exculpatory, was not suppressed, and did not prejudice the trial outcome.
3. Thompson's claims that the prosecutor was required to provide a transcript of the 911 recording and misled the jury in closing argument were unavailing and did not warrant coram nobis relief.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Thompson demonstrated a fundamental error extrinsic to the record warranting permission to pursue a writ of error coram nobis based on alleged prosecutorial suppression of the victim's 911 recording and portions of an investigative file.
2. Whether the alleged suppression established a meritorious Brady violation supporting coram nobis relief.
3. Whether Thompson was entitled to file a pro se reply to the State's response.

Disposition

other