Loftis v. Hobbs, 2013 Ark. 352

In 2003 Orvil Dale Loftis pled guilty to multiple felonies, including a Class Y offense: possession of methamphetamine with intent to deliver; the trial court suspended imposition of sentence.
In 2005 the State successfully petitioned to revoke the suspended imposition of sentence; the court imposed an aggregate 480-month sentence and a $2,500 fine; the Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed.
On appeal from the revocation, Loftis argued the suspended sentence for a Class Y felony was illegal; he conceded Elders v. State supported allowing suspension/probation for Class Y offenses but asked the courts to revisit that precedent; the court of appeals declined.
In 2011 Loftis filed a pro se habeas-corpus petition in Lincoln County circuit court, again arguing the judgment-and-commitment was invalid because a Class Y sentence had been suspended.
The circuit court dismissed the habeas petition; Loftis appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court, which affirmed, holding the claim was precluded by law of the case and did not show facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Loftis's judgment-and-commitment is facially invalid because the court suspended imposition for a Class Y felony	Loftis: suspended sentence for Class Y felony was illegal and renders judgment invalid	State: Elders and prior appellate adjudication permit suspension; claim was already litigated and not facially invalid	Court: Dismissed — claim precluded by law of the case and not facially invalid or jurisdictional

Elders v. State, 321 Ark. 60, 900 S.W.2d 170 (1995) (held that Act changes authorized probation and, by analogy, suspended imposition for Class Y offenses)
Young v. Norris, 365 Ark. 219, 226 S.W.3d 797 (2006) (petitioner's burden in habeas: show facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction with probable-cause evidence)
Davis v. Reed, 316 Ark. 575, 873 S.W.2d 524 (1994) (writ of habeas available only for facially invalid judgments or lack of jurisdiction)