Lukach v. State
2017 Ark. 128
| Ark. | 2017Background
- Petitioner John Richard Lukach, sentenced to life terms in four consolidated cases (30CR-91-115, -123, -124, -126), filed a postconviction petition under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-90-111 challenging those convictions and sentences.
- The trial court denied the petition after a hearing; Lukach appealed and tendered an incomplete record and late filing, but this Court allowed the appeal to proceed and treated a requested writ of certiorari as a motion for access to the record.
- Lukach moved to supplement the record, to extend briefing time, for duplicate briefs at State expense, for expanded page limits, for appointment of counsel, to compel the ADC to assist, and to have certain affidavits considered.
- This Court reviewed the record and identified that some requested trial-court filings appeared missing for cases 30CR-91-123 and 30CR-91-124, but that supplementation for 30CR-91-115 and 30CR-91-126 would not change the outcome.
- The Court remanded for a supplemental record limited to specified documents for 30CR-91-123 and 30CR-91-124, dismissed the appeals as to 30CR-91-115 and 30CR-91-126, and denied Lukach’s requests for duplication, expanded pages, appointment of counsel, and to compel the ADC.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appellate record is incomplete and should be supplemented | Lukach: key petition pages, supporting affidavit, amended pleadings, and motion for reconsideration were omitted and must be added | State: no response needed; many contested documents are either moot or not outcome-determinative | Court: granted supplementation limited to listed documents for 30CR-91-123 and 30CR-91-124; denied for 30CR-91-115 and 30CR-91-126 (those appeals dismissed) |
| Whether any claims in 30CR-91-115 and 30CR-91-126 have merit such that appeal should proceed | Lukach: multiple claims including missing verdict forms, improper venue, sentencing errors, double jeopardy, and absence at sentencing | State: existing record shows claims lack merit; law-of-the-case and prior rulings preclude relief | Court: clear lack of merit; dismissed appeals for those two cases |
| Whether Lukach’s contention that sentences are illegal (facially invalid) succeeds | Lukach: several sentencing-related defects, including alleged void commitment orders and judge-exchange scheme | State: most claims are procedural/trial error or untimely under Rule 37 and not facially invalid | Court: only the challenge that two commitment orders (30CR-91-123 & -124) may be void survived and was limited for briefing; all other sentencing claims denied as untimely or meritless |
| Whether court should grant ancillary relief (duplicate briefs at State expense, expanded page limits, appointment of counsel, ADC compelled to assist) | Lukach: indigency and incarceration prevent compliance; needs copies, more pages, counsel, and institutional assistance | State: postconviction is civil; appellant must show substantial merit and inability to proceed without counsel or resources | Court: denied all ancillary relief (no substantial showing of merit or entitlement; briefing limited so extra pages unnecessary) |
Key Cases Cited
- Lukach v. State, 310 Ark. 119 (affirming convictions in two counts in one trial) (background appellate decision)
- Lukach v. State, 310 Ark. 38 (affirming convictions from second trial) (background appellate decision)
- Green v. State, 2016 Ark. 386 (502 S.W.3d 524) (appeal from denial of postconviction relief may be dismissed when meritless)
- Thompson v. State, 2016 Ark. 380 (per curiam) (postconviction review limits; merit threshold)
- State v. Wilmoth, 369 Ark. 346 (255 S.W.3d 419) (postconviction proceedings treated as civil for purposes of appointed relief)
- Maxie v. Gaines, 317 Ark. 229 (876 S.W.2d 572) (indigence alone insufficient to require duplication at State expense)