Allen v. Kelley
2015 Ark. 490
Ark.2015Background
- David Lee Allen was convicted of aggravated robbery in 1981, received life imprisonment, and after multiple retrials his conviction and life sentence were ultimately affirmed on direct appeal.
- In March 2015 Allen filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in Lee County, where he is incarcerated; the circuit court dismissed the petition on the pleadings for failure to establish cause.
- Allen appealed the dismissal and moved for clarification/reconsideration; the circuit court issued a supplemental order reiterating that Allen failed to show a basis for habeas relief.
- Allen’s habeas petition alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel for advising against a plea and for failing to present mitigating evidence, challenged the use of peremptory strikes (both sides), and argued Eighth Amendment/Equal Protection claims invoking Graham v. Florida based on alleged diminished culpability at age twenty-one.
- The circuit court concluded Allen’s claims did not establish that the judgment-and-commitment order was facially invalid or that the trial court lacked jurisdiction; the Supreme Court of Arkansas dismissed the appeal as meritless and deemed Allen’s motion to file a belated brief moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether habeas corpus is available for claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel | Allen: counsel erred in advising against plea and failing to present mitigating evidence, producing prejudice | State: ineffective-assistance claims are not cognizable in habeas where judgment is facially valid and jurisdiction is not challenged | Court: Claim not cognizable in habeas; dismissal affirmed |
| Whether Graham v. Florida protects a 21-year-old from life without parole for nonhomicide offenses | Allen: at 21 he has diminished culpability and should be treated like juveniles under Graham | State: Graham applies only to persons 18 or younger and does not render sentence void or require resentencing for 21-year-olds | Court: Graham inapplicable; sentence not invalid on its face |
| Whether alleged discriminatory use of peremptory challenges voids the judgment | Allen: counsel and State excluded jurors on race, violating right to impartial jury | State: peremptory-strike disputes do not render judgment facially invalid or affect jurisdiction; habeas is not the vehicle to relitigate trial errors | Court: Such claims cannot be raised in habeas to attack facial validity; dismissal affirmed |
| Whether the judgment-and-commitment order is facially invalid or the trial court lacked jurisdiction | Allen: assorted arguments claiming sentence/conviction defects | State: judgment is within statutory limits and court had jurisdiction; Allen provided no affidavit/evidence showing illegal detention | Court: Judgment not void on its face; petitioner failed to meet burden for habeas relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Allen v. State, 277 Ark. 380 (reversal and remand for new trial) (background appellate history)
- Allen v. State, 281 Ark. 1 (affirming conviction after retrial) (background appellate history)
- Daniels v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 192 (appeal from habeas denied when appellant cannot prevail)
- Young v. Norris, 365 Ark. 219 (burden on petitioner to show facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction in habeas)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) (Eighth Amendment rule limiting life without parole for nonhomicide juvenile offenders)
- Woodson v. Hobbs, 2015 Ark. 304 (per curiam) (ineffective-assistance claims not cognizable in habeas proceedings)