Newton v. State
2014 Ark. 538
| Ark. | 2014Background
- Newton was convicted in 2011 of sexual indecency with a child and sexual assault in the second degree, receiving 288 months’ imprisonment.
- The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction; mandate issued February 15, 2012.
- Newton, pro se, filed a 2012 Rule 37.1 postconviction petition alleging ineffective assistance and other trial issues; petition dismissed as untimely with prejudice.
- Newton filed a second pro se petition in Lee County, which the circuit court denied; this court dismissed on jurisdictional grounds in Newton v. State, 2013 Ark. 320 (per curiam).
- A third pro se petition was filed in September 2013 raising substantially the same claims; the trial court again dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
- On appeal, Newton argued trial counsel failures, coercion of the victim’s statements, prosecutorial conduct, and an asserted safeguard requiring a Sex Offender Acknowledgment Form.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the petitions were timely under Rule 37.2(c). | Newton argues first petition timely; seeks relief for ineffective assistance. | State contends petitions were untimely and tampered with jurisdictional bars. | Petitions untimely; trial court lacked jurisdiction. |
| Whether the petition states cognizable postconviction claims under Rule 37.1. | Newton contends ineffective assistance and related trial errors are cognizable. | State asserts claims are improperly labeled and not properly preserved. | Claims cognizable under Rule 37.1 but jurisdiction bars loom. |
| Whether appellate appointment of counsel is warranted in postconviction proceedings. | Newton seeks counsel due to lack of jurisdiction and potential relief. | State argues no right to counsel where trial court lacks jurisdiction and no substantial likelihood of relief. | No appointment of counsel because lack of jurisdiction forecloses relief. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ussery v. State, 2014 Ark. 186 (Ark. 2014) (postconviction Rule 37.1 applicability regardless of label)
- Newton v. State, 2013 Ark. 320 (Ark. 2013) (mandate rule and jurisdictional constraints in postconviction)
- Ewells v. State, 2014 Ark. 351 (Ark. 2014) (Rule 37.2(c) jurisdictional timelines; mandatory dismissal)
- Cooper v. State, 2013 Ark. 243 (Ark. 2013) (precedent on Rule 37.2(c) and jurisdictional bars)
- Hill v. State, 2014 Ark. 420 (Ark. 2014) (claims raised for first time on appeal not addressed)
- Green v. State, 2013 Ark. 455 (Ark. 2013) (per curiam; procedural timing limits on postconviction review)
- Pruitt v. State, 2014 Ark. 258 (Ark. 2014) (jurisdictional constraints on postconviction relief appeals)
- Evans v. State, 2014 Ark. 6 (Ark. 2014) (appointment of counsel in postconviction matters when warranted)
- Nickelson v. State, 2013 Ark. 252 (Ark. 2013) (trial error generally addressed in trial court)