State v. Harrison
2012 Ark. 198
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Harrison was convicted of capital murder of Fulton Watson; two eyewitnesses testified identifying Harrison; sentence life without parole; direct appeal affirmed.
- Harrison filed a Rule 37 petition for postconviction relief; circuit court granted a new trial; State appealed.
- Initial review showed the petition timing/jurisdiction; this Court remanded to determine timeliness, then found timely filing.
- Circuit court ruled trial counsel’s failure to uncover Ingram’s juvenile capital-murder adjudication prejudiced Harrison by impeding a defense theory implicating Ingram.
- The ultimate issue is whether trial counsel’s conduct in investigating Ingram is cognizable under Strickland and not barred by law-of-the-case; the majority affirmed relief, while a dissent disagreed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether law of the case bars Rule 37 claim re: counsel's investigation | Harrison | State | Not barred; law-of-the-case does not govern defense-counsel conduct not adjudicated previously |
| Whether trial counsel's failure to uncover Ingram's juvenile adjudication was prejudicial | Harrison | State | Prejudice shown; reasonable probability of different outcome |
| Whether admissibility under Rule 609/Zinger supports defense theory | Harrison | State | No contrary ruling; in-depth defense feasible without substantive admission; theory not barred |
| Whether there was reasonable probability jury would have acquitted with proper investigation | Harrison | State | Yes; diminished credibility of key witnesses and alternative defense undermines guilt |
Key Cases Cited
- Lee v. State, 11 S.W.3d 553 (Ark. 2000) (prejudice focus in failure-to-disclose context)
- Zinger v. State, 852 S.W.2d 320 (Ark. 1993) (evidence implicating third party must directly link to crime)
- Holmes v. South Carolina, 547 U.S. 319 (2006) (focus on strength of third-party evidence under admissibility test)
- Armstrong v. State, 284 S.W.3d 1 (Ark. 2008) (retest of Zinger standard for admissibility)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Anderson v. State, 385 S.W.3d 783 (Ark. 2011) (Strickland prejudice prong requires reasonable probability of different outcome)
- Sartin v. State, 400 S.W.3d 694 (Ark. 2012) (totality of evidence in ineffective assistance review)
- Lee v. State, 340 Ark. 504 (Ark. 2000) (prejudice assessment in discovery disclosures)
- Green v. State, 577 S.W.2d 586 (Ark. 1979) (presence at scene not alone proof of guilt)