Green v. State
2016 Ark. 386
| Ark. | 2016Background
- In 1979 Richard W. Green pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and was sentenced to imprisonment for the rest of his natural life.
- Green previously sought Rule 37.1 relief; this Court affirmed denial in Green v. State, 297 Ark. 49 (affirming that no promises were made about a term of years).
- In June 2014 Green filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis (and alternative motions) claiming various defects: alleged misstatements by the trial court at plea, ineffective assistance of counsel, defects in the commitment order (missing judge signature/seal/language), lack of a stated minimum term, a promised seven-year parole agreement, and newly learned fingerprint evidence implicating a third party.
- The trial court denied coram-nobis relief; Green appealed and filed a pro se motion for use of record/transcript and for extension of time to file his brief.
- The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as Green could not prevail on the record and therefore the motion was rendered moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Green) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether coram-nobis relief is warranted for alleged plea/commitment defects | Plea/commitment contained false statements and clerical defects making sentence illegal | Claims are conclusory, not within coram-nobis categories, and many could have been raised earlier | Denied — claims are conclusory and not cognizable in coram-nobis proceedings |
| Whether Green exercised due diligence in seeking coram-nobis relief | Illness and late discovery (fingerprints in 2011) prevented earlier filing | Due diligence required; many claims known or could have been raised earlier; Green filed prior habeas in 1995 | Denied — Green failed to show the required due diligence |
| Whether alleged promise of a seven-year term coerced the guilty plea | Plea was coerced because Green believed he would serve seven years; counsel ineffective for not enforcing parole term | Alleged promise amounts to ineffective-assistance and miscommunication; ineffective-assistance and trial error are not grounds for coram-nobis | Denied — ineffective-assistance/trial-error not cognizable in coram-nobis; no allegation of coerced plea under recognized coram-nobis standards |
| Whether withheld fingerprint evidence (Briner) constitutes Brady material warranting coram-nobis relief | Fingerprint on murder weapon (Briner) was not disclosed until 2011 and is material/exculpatory | Allegation is unproven, not shown suppressed, and would not have prevented rendition of judgment given Green’s plea and his admission regarding borrowing the gun | Denied — alleged evidence not shown to be material or suppressed such that it would have prevented conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Green v. State, 297 Ark. 49 (affirming prior Rule 37.1 denial and finding no promise of a term of years in plea negotiations)
- State v. Larimore, 341 Ark. 397 (coram-nobis is an extraordinary remedy with strong presumption of validity of conviction)
- Campbell v. State, 265 Ark. 77 (a life sentence is for the natural life of the person; "natural life" equals "life")
- Curry v. State, 276 Ark. 312 (life sentence interpretation consistent with Campbell)
- Williams v. State, 273 Ark. 315 (subsequent Rule 37 petitions generally not allowed after an adjudicated petition)