Fernandez v. State
2011 Ark. 418
| Ark. | 2011Background
- Fernandez obtained a belated appeal for Rule 37.1 due to lack of notice of entry, which this court previously granted pro se.
- Fernandez now moves to file a belated reply brief; the court declines to reach merits.
- A jury sentenced Fernandez to life for one count of rape; this court affirmed on appeal.
- Rule 37.1 petition was denied without a hearing; the court finds the petition wholly without merit and affirms dismissal.
- The court concludes the appeal is moot and dismisses the petition for postconviction relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 37.1 petition was wholly without merit | Fernandez argued merits for postconviction relief | State contends petition lacks merit on record | Petition withdrawn/denied; relief denied |
| Whether appellate review of ineffective assistance is proper under Strickland | Fernandez asserts ineffective assistance of counsel | State contends no merit shown under Strickland | Claims lacking merit under Strickland standards |
| Whether alleged failures to investigate could have changed outcome | Additional investigation would have uncovered favorable evidence | Evidence identified would not have altered result or was inadmissible | Insufficient factual substantiation; no prejudice shown |
| Whether failure to call an expert prejudiced the defense | Expert testimony could have refuted or cast doubt on DNA results | No specific witness or admissible testimony identified | No prejudice established; petition properly denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Fernandez v. State, 2010 Ark. 148, 362 S.W.3d 905 (Ark. 2010) (affirmed life-rape conviction on direct appeal; referenced Rule 37.1 context)
- Gonder v. State, 2011 Ark. 248, 382 S.W.3d 674 (Ark. 2011) (affirm denial of Rule 37.1 petition even without written findings if merit is conclusively shown)
- Anderson v. State, 2010 Ark. 404, 373 S.W.3d 876 (Ark. 2010) (totality-of-the-evidence standard for ineffective assistance; two-prong Strickland analysis)
- Croy v. State, 2011 Ark. 284, 383 S.W.3d 367 (Ark. 2011) (defines Strickland standard application in Arkansas postconviction review)
- Carter v. State, 2010 Ark. 231, 364 S.W.3d 46 (Ark. 2010) (prejudice showing required to establish ineffective assistance)