Mohammed v. State, 2017 Ark. 101

In 2012 Ka’Ron Daule Mohammed pled guilty to second-degree murder and a judgment reflected a 40-year term for the murder plus a consecutive 15-year enhancement under Ark. Code § 16-90-120, for an aggregate 55-year sentence.
In 2016 Mohammed filed a petition under Ark. Code § 16-90-111 arguing the 40-year term exceeded the statutory maximum for second-degree murder (30 years) and that the judgment was facially invalid.
The trial court denied relief, finding Mohammed had been sentenced as a habitual offender (which increases the applicable statutory maximum) and therefore the sentence was not illegal.
The State pointed to the plea hearing transcript and plea documents acknowledging three prior convictions and advising the parties the potential sentence range was based on habitual-offender status.
Although the court found Mohammed was sentenced as a habitual offender, the judgment form did not check the box indicating habitual-offender status, creating an apparent clerical error on the face of the judgment.
The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s factual finding that Mohammed was sentenced as a habitual offender but remanded with instructions to correct the judgment nunc pro tunc to reflect that status.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 40-year sentence for second-degree murder is illegal on its face because it exceeds the 30-year statutory maximum for a non-habitual Class A felony	Mohammed: 40 years exceeds 30-year max for second-degree murder and judgment is facially invalid	State: Mohammed was a habitual offender, which raises the statutory maximum and makes 40 years lawful	Court: Mohammed was sentenced as a habitual offender; sentence not illegal
Whether the facially defective judgment (habitual-offender box unchecked) must be corrected	Mohammed: Judgment controls and should be reduced if facially invalid	State: Clerical mistake; remand to correct judgment to reflect actual sentencing as habitual offender	Court: Remand for judgment nunc pro tunc to reflect habitual-offender status

Green v. State, 2016 Ark. 386, 502 S.W.3d 524 (sentence illegal on its face standard under § 16-90-111)
Williams v. State, 2016 Ark. 16, 479 S.W.3d 544 (petitioner bears burden to show sentence illegal; standard of review)
Atkins v. State, 2014 Ark. 393, 441 S.W.3d 19 (clear-error standard explained)
Green v. State, 2013 Ark. 497, 430 S.W.3d 729 (use of nunc pro tunc judgment to correct clerical error)
Stenhouse v. State, 362 Ark. 480, 209 S.W.3d 352 (judgment as entered controls if facially valid)
Philyaw v. Kelley, 2015 Ark. 465, 477 S.W.3d 503 (sentencing governed by statute in effect at time of offense)
Reed v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 61 (trial court should correct judgment to reflect true sentence when clerical error present)