Reams v. State, 560 S.W.3d 441

Reams was convicted of capital murder (1993) for the ATM robbery and shooting of Turner; he testified at trial admitting complicity in the robbery and that the firearm came from him.
Postconviction Rule 37 proceedings produced testimony (Goodwin and Curry) that Goodwin — not Reams — fired the fatal shot; Curry said he heard Goodwin admit shooting Turner.
The circuit court (2017) denied Reams relief on guilt-phase ineffective-assistance claims but granted relief as to penalty-phase counsel ineffectiveness and vacated Reams's death sentence.
Reams appealed the guilt-phase rulings and the court remanded certain issues; the State cross-appealed the Rule 37 grant as to the penalty phase.
The appellate court affirmed denial of guilt-phase claims about other-crimes evidence (404(b)) because Reams’ own trial testimony undercut prejudice.
The court held (1) a Duren fair-cross-section claim is structural and cognizable in Rule 37 proceedings (prejudice presumed if violation shown), and (2) counsel was ineffective in the penalty phase for failing to attempt to present Goodwin’s testimony, warranting vacatur of death sentence.

Issue	Reams's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Admissibility of other-crimes evidence (404(b))	Counsel ineffective for not objecting; prejudicial references to other crimes	Evidence was admissible or harmless given Reams's admission	Denied — no Strickland prejudice shown given Reams’s trial admission; affirmed
Batson (racially discriminatory peremptory strikes)	New Rule 37 evidence supports revisiting Batson; claim structural	Batson was raised and rejected on direct appeal; Rule 37 not a vehicle to re-litigate settled claims	Declined to revisit Batson on Rule 37; claim barred as already adjudicated
Duren fair-cross-section of jury	Jefferson County juror pools underrepresent African Americans due to systemic practices; counsel ineffective for failing to challenge	Rule 37 ordinarily cannot raise issues already litigated; prejudice required under Strickland	Duren violation held structural and cognizable in Rule 37; prejudice presumed if prima facie Duren shown; remanded for factual findings
Penalty-phase ineffective assistance (failure to call Goodwin)	Counsel failed to investigate/call Goodwin; his testimony would have created reasonable doubt at sentencing	Doubt Goodwin would testify; even if he did, Reams’s role in procuring gun and complicity makes outcome unlikely to change	Affirmed grant of relief as to penalty phase: counsel deficient for not attempting to present Goodwin; reasonable probability of different sentencing outcome; death sentence vacated

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (ineffective-assistance two-prong standard)
Duren v. Missouri, 439 U.S. 357 (fair-cross-section prima facie test)
Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (peremptory strikes and race)
Weaver v. Massachusetts, 137 S. Ct. 1899 (prejudice analysis for structural errors in ineffective-assistance claims)
Gonzalez-Lopez v. United States, 548 U.S. 140 (certain errors are structural)
Wiggins v. Smith, 539 U.S. 510 (counsel’s duty to investigate and present mitigating evidence at sentencing)
Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (fair-cross-section principle for petit juries)
Vasquez v. Hillery, 474 U.S. 254 (exclusion of African Americans from grand juries is structural)
Reams v. State, 322 Ark. 336 (Reams’s prior direct-appeal decisions referenced)
Wainwright v. State, 307 Ark. 569 (Arkansas precedent on fair-cross-section and prejudice)