Robinson v. State
2014 Ark. 310
Ark.2014Background
- Robinson was convicted in 2009 by a jury on two counts of attempted first-degree murder and two counts of first-degree battery, with a firearm enhancement for an aggregate sentence of 1620 months.
- Appeals court affirmed; Robinson filed a pro se postconviction (Rule 37.1) petition, denied December 28, 2011, and sought belated appeal after not timely filing a notice of appeal.
- This court granted belated appeal due to lack of Rule 37.3(d) notice requirement; the appeal challenges the denial of Rule 37.1 relief.
- The petition alleged ineffective assistance of counsel at trial; the trial court did not hold an evidentiary hearing and adopted the State’s response in its order.
- The court applies Strickland v. Washington two-prong standard: deficient performance and resulting prejudice, reviewing for clear error.
- The Court affirms, holding the petition fails to establish ineffective assistance or a denial of due process warranting relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel's performance was ineffective under Strickland | Robinson | State | No reversible error; performance not deficient or prejudicial |
| Whether failure to move for a stronger directed verdict was ineffective assistance | Robinson | State | Not meritorious; credibility of victims support verdict |
| Whether trial counsel's handling of Traylor impeachment was ineffective | Robinson | State | Trial strategy; no prejudice shown |
| Whether failure to investigate Harris and continuance was ineffective assistance | Robinson | State | Speculative prejudice; Harris exculpatory; not error |
| Whether trial counsel erred in failing to obtain a second-degree battery instruction or to federalize it | Robinson | State | No reversible error; defense theory not supported |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (establishes two-prong standard for ineffective assistance)
- Anthony v. State, 2014 Ark. 195 (Ark. 2014) (need for written findings when no evidentiary hearing)
- Lemaster v. State, 2013 Ark. 449 (Ark. 2013) (per curiam; standard for denial without relief)
- Eason v. State, 2011 Ark. 352 (Ark. 2011) (requirement of written findings on Rule 37.3(a))
- Holloway v. State, 2013 Ark. 140 (Ark. 2013) (ineffective assistance standard and prejudice analysis)
- Conley v. State, 2014 Ark. 172 (Ark. 2014) (review of Rule 37.1 denial for clear error)
- Williams v. State, 369 Ark. 104 (Ark. 2007) (standard for evaluating counsel’s performance)
- Abernathy v. State, 2012 Ark. 59 (Ark. 2012) (objective reasonableness of counsel; strong presumption of competence)
- Green v. State, 2013 Ark. 497 (Ark. 2013) (credibility determinations lie with the jury)
- Prater v. State, 2012 Ark. 164 (Ark. 2012) (trial strategy considerations; postconviction relief limits)
- Fretwell v. State, 292 S.W.2d 180 (Ark. 1987) (trial strategy and postconviction review limits)
- Clarks v. State, 2011 Ark. 296 (Ark. 2011) (reasonableness of professional judgment in strategy)
- Leak v. State, 2011 Ark. 353 (Ark. 2011) (issues of trial strategy reviewed deferentially)
- Ewells v. State, 2010 Ark. 407 (Ark. 2010) (habits of postconviction review for ineffective assistance)
- Walton v. State, 2013 Ark. 265 (Ark. 2013) (consecutive vs concurrent sentencing within trial court discretion)