Hinkston v. State, 2014 Ark. 504

Michael Hinkston was charged (1997) and convicted (1998) of capital-felony murder (underlying felony: residential burglary), residential burglary, and theft of property; he received life without parole for capital murder and 20 years for theft.
Hinkston previously appealed; conviction affirmed in Hinkston v. State.
In September 2014 Hinkston filed a pro se habeas-corpus petition in Lee County raising claims attacking his convictions and trial proceedings.
Hinkston’s claims included: (1) theft was not a proper underlying felony for capital murder; (2) insufficient evidence for theft; (3) constitutionally deficient jury instructions; and (4) erroneous denial of expert psychologist testimony.
The circuit court denied the habeas petition; Hinkston appealed and also moved for appointment of counsel on appeal.
The Arkansas Supreme Court dismissed the appeal as meritless and ruled the appointment-of-counsel motion moot because the claims did not show facial invalidity of the judgment or lack of jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether theft was an impermissible basis for capital-murder conviction	Hinkston: theft was not an underlying felony to support capital murder	State: residential burglary (charged and convicted) was the underlying felony; theft was a separate conviction	Court: Theft was not used as the underlying felony; claim fails
Sufficiency of evidence for theft conviction	Hinkston: evidence insufficient to sustain theft conviction	State: sufficiency is a trial-error claim not cognizable in habeas	Court: Claim is trial error/insufficiency and not a basis for habeas relief
Jury instructions constitutionally deficient	Hinkston: instructions unconstitutional	State: instruction challenges are trial errors, not facial invalidity	Court: Not cognizable in habeas; claim fails
Denial of clinical-psychologist expert testimony	Hinkston: erroneous denial of expert testimony affected trial fairness	State: evidentiary/trial error that does not show lack of jurisdiction or facial invalidity	Court: Not cognizable in habeas; claim fails

Hinkston v. State, 340 Ark. 530, 10 S.W.3d 906 (Ark. 2000) (prior appeal affirming convictions)
Lukach v. State, 369 Ark. 475, 255 S.W.3d 832 (Ark. 2007) (appeals without merit may be dismissed)
Davis v. Reed, 316 Ark. 575, 873 S.W.2d 524 (Ark. 1994) (writ proper when judgment invalid on its face or court lacked jurisdiction)
Young v. Norris, 365 Ark. 219, 226 S.W.3d 797 (Ark. 2006) (petitioner bears burden to plead facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction)
Flowers v. Norris, 347 Ark. 760, 68 S.W.3d 289 (Ark. 2002) (separate convictions/sentences for capital murder and underlying felonies permitted)
Daniels v. Hobbs, 2011 Ark. 192 (Ark. 2011) (illegal search and insufficiency are not grounds for habeas writ)
Hill v. State, 2013 Ark. 413 (Ark. 2013) (trial error insufficient for habeas relief)
Quezada v. Hobbs, 2014 Ark. 396, 441 S.W.3d 910 (Ark. 2014) (petitioner's failure to meet habeas burden warrants dismissal)