Sanders v. Straughn, 2014 Ark. 312

Corey Sanders, convicted in Columbia County of two counts of capital murder and sentenced to life; conviction affirmed on direct appeal in Sanders v. State.
Sanders filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus in Jefferson County challenging the Columbia County judgment and arguing jurisdictional and procedural defects.
His habeas petition alleged: defective original information (felony-murder basis), unlawful amendment of the information, improper juror seating, and that charging by information (rather than indictment) was unconstitutional.
The Jefferson County Circuit Court dismissed the petition for failure to allege facial invalidity of the judgment or lack of jurisdiction and for failing to show probable cause that he was illegally detained.
The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed, finding Sanders did not plead a cognizable habeas claim or make the required probable-cause showing and that many asserted errors were non-jurisdictional trial errors.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether circuit court erred by not issuing summons/responding before dismissing petition	Sanders: statute required summons and response before dismissal	State: statute for these habeas proceedings did not require service or response; court may dismiss where petition fails on its face	Held: No error — no summons/response required; dismissal proper when petition lacks cognizable grounds or probable cause
Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction because the information was defective or improperly amended	Sanders: original information charged felony murder with improper underlying felony; amendment was unlawful and changed the offense	State: amendments allowed if they do not change nature/degree or cause unfair surprise; changes here altered manner, not nature	Held: No jurisdictional defect; amendments permitted; claim not cognizable in habeas absent facial invalidity or illegal sentence
Whether charging by information (vs. indictment) was unconstitutional	Sanders: charging by information violated constitution	State: charging by information is permitted	Held: No — defendant may be charged by information; claim fails
Whether a juror was improperly seated (bias)	Sanders: juror bias required relief	State: issue previously litigated in post-conviction proceedings and is a trial irregularity not cognizable on habeas	Held: No relief — trial irregularity/ineffective-assistance-type claims not grounds for habeas

Sanders v. State, 340 Ark. 163 (affirming capital-murder conviction)
Green v. State, 2012 Ark. 19 (386 S.W.3d 413) (felony-information may be amended pre-verdict if nature/degree unchanged and no unfair surprise)
Glaze v. State, 2011 Ark. 464 (385 S.W.3d 203) (same principle on permissible amendments to information)
Terry v. State, 371 Ark. 50 (263 S.W.3d 528) (distinguishing changes in manner of commission from change in nature of offense)
Nance v. State, 323 Ark. 583 (918 S.W.2d 114) (amendment analysis and prejudice inquiry)
Ruiz v. State, 299 Ark. 144 (772 S.W.2d 297) (upholding charging by information in appropriate circumstances)