Hendrix v. State
2016 Ark. 168
Ark.2016Background
- Hendrix was convicted in 2013 in a bench trial of internet stalking of a child and sentenced to 240 months’ imprisonment.
- The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction; the mandate issued February 5, 2015.
- Hendrix filed a pro se Rule 37.1 postconviction petition in the trial court on April 2, 2015, but the petition was not properly verified.
- On June 3, 2015, Hendrix submitted a letter claiming he had learned of the verification defect and enclosed a signed verification.
- The trial court held a hearing and denied the petition despite the defective verification.
- The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal due to failure to comply with Rule 37.1(c)’s verification requirement and timeliness.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 37.1 verification was satisfied | Hendrix argues for consideration despite delay. | State contends petition not properly verified per Rule 37.1(c). | Petition not properly verified; dismissal required. |
| Whether the petition was timely under Rule 37.2(c)(ii) | Hendrix timely under the mandate date rule. | Timeliness mandatory; no timely verified petition filed. | Time requirements mandatory; petition not timely. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bradley v. State, 2015 Ark. 144 (Ark. 2015) (verification is substantively important to prevent perjury)
- Barrow v. State, 2012 Ark. 197 (Ark. 2012) (timing for Rule 37.1 petitions governs dismissal when untimely)
- Hunt v. State, 2016 Ark. 57 (Ark. 2016) (mandatory time requirements; merits not reached if untimely)