Green v. State, 2014 Ark. 284

Garland Green was convicted by bench trial in 2010 of attempted capital murder, possession of a firearm by a felon, and first-degree battery; aggregate sentence 120 months. The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed on direct appeal.
Green filed a timely, verified pro se Rule 37.1 postconviction petition alleging multiple instances of ineffective assistance of trial counsel; a hearing was held and the trial court denied relief.
The transcript of the Rule 37.1 hearing was not included in the postconviction record on appeal; Green did not seek certiorari or to supplement the record with that transcript.
Green’s petition alleged counsel knew of evidence tampering and false swearing in police reports, failed to call alibi and expert witnesses, failed to interview/impeach key witnesses, and performed an inadequate pretrial investigation.
The trial court denied relief; on appeal the Supreme Court of Arkansas reviewed only the issues Green raised and applied the Strickland two-prong standard for ineffective-assistance claims.
The Supreme Court affirmed, finding Green’s claims largely conclusory, lacking factual detail to show deficient performance or prejudice, and insufficient to overcome the presumption that counsel’s conduct was reasonable.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Record adequacy	Green implicitly argues record should include hearing transcript for review	State notes transcript was not included and Green did not move to supplement; direct-appeal record is consolidated automatically	Court held Green bore burden to produce record; no transcript, no error shown
Alleged tampering/false swearing	Counsel knew of tampering and perjured statements and failed to act	State: allegations were conclusory without factual substantiation showing prejudice	Court held conclusory allegations insufficient under Strickland; no relief
Failure to secure witness testimony (alibi, expert)	Counsel failed to call favorable alibi/expert witnesses whose testimony would have aided defense	State: Green failed to specify the testimony or show it would have changed outcome	Court held Green did not identify specific expected testimony or its likely effect; claim fails
Inadequate pretrial investigation	Counsel did not adequately investigate, depriving Green of evidence that would have changed result	State: Green failed to delineate specific prejudice or materials that further investigation would have produced	Court held petitioner must show specific prejudice from lack of investigation; Green failed to do so

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (establishes two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)
Williams v. State, 369 Ark. 104 (applying Strickland standard in Arkansas)
Howard v. State, 367 Ark. 18 (defines reasonable-probability prejudice standard, includes sentencing prejudice)
Drymon v. State, 327 Ark. 375 (direct-appeal record is consolidated with postconviction record)