Murry v. Hobbs, 2014 Ark. 98

Murry pleaded guilty in 2005 to theft by receiving, felon in possession of a firearm, and possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, receiving ten-year suspended sentences and $500 costs on each count.
A 2009 petition for revocation alleged violation of suspended-sentence conditions; after a revocation hearing, the court revoked the suspended imposition of sentence and imposed 360 months’ incarceration.
The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the revocation and sentence in Murry v. State, 2010 Ark. App. 782.
In 2013, Murry filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in Jefferson County Circuit Court, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and illegal sentencing related to the 2005 plea and the 2009 sentence.
The circuit court denied the habeas petition; Murry sought appellate review and moved for default judgment alleging the State’s failure to file a brief timely.
A writ of habeas corpus is proper only if the judgment is facially invalid or the court lacked jurisdiction; the petition fails to show either, and the court’s order is affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the default-judgment motion was proper	Murry contends the State’s late brief warrants reversal.	State timely filed its brief; no rule requires reversal for late filing.	Motion denied; timely filing satisfactory.
Whether habeas corpus was proper on the stated claims	Ineffective assistance and illegal sentence warrant habeas relief.	Ineffective-assistance claims are not cognizable in habeas and the 2005 sentence was not facially invalid.	Writ denied; petition did not show lack of jurisdiction or facial invalidity.

Glaze v. Hobbs, 2013 Ark. 458 (Ark. Sup. Ct. 2013) (habeas standard—jurisdiction or facial invalidity required)
Abernathy v. Norris, 2011 Ark. 335 (Ark. Sup. Ct. 2011) (per curiam; habeas limitations)
Davis v. Reed, 316 Ark. 575 (Ark. 1994) (habeas burden to show invalid commitment)
Young v. Norris, 365 Ark. 219 (Ark. 2006) (probable-cause showing required for writ)
Hill v. State, 2013 Ark. 413 (Ark. 2013) (clear-error review for habeas decisions)
Pankau v. State, 2013 Ark. 162 (Ark. 2013) (per curiam; standard for habeas review)
Loftis v. Hobbs, 2013 Ark. 352 (Ark. 2013) (per curiam; jurisdictional validity)
Culbertson v. State, 2012 Ark. 112 (Ark. 2012) (facial invalidity and jurisdiction basics)
Rodgers v. State, 2011 Ark. 443 (Ark. 2011) (Rule 37.1; ineffective-counsel claims)
Tryon v. State, 2011 Ark. 76 (Ark. 2011) (counsel-ineffectiveness not habeas remedy)