577 S.W.3d 385
Ark.2019Background
- Steven L. McArthur was convicted by a jury in 1991 of capital murder and sentenced to life without parole; this Court affirmed on direct appeal.
- In 2018 McArthur filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging (inter alia) newly surfaced affidavits supporting actual innocence, Brady violations, prosecutorial and law‑enforcement misconduct, speedy‑trial violation, lack of underlying felony conviction on the face of the judgment, denial of counsel issues, and lack of law‑library access.
- The Lee County Circuit Court dismissed the petition as untimely and without merit; McArthur appealed and filed a motion for default judgment.
- The Supreme Court reviewed whether the habeas petition stated cognizable grounds (facial invalidity of judgment or lack of jurisdiction) or otherwise demonstrated probable cause of illegal detention.
- The majority held most of McArthur’s claims are not cognizable in habeas because they challenge trial error, sufficiency of the evidence, or procedural defects that do not show facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction; the petition failed to show probable cause.
- The Court affirmed the dismissal and denied McArthur’s motion for default judgment; Justice Hart dissented, arguing the habeas statute allows allegations of actual innocence and many claims could constitute unlawful detention.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cognizability of claims in habeas | McArthur contends newly alleged evidence and multiple trial errors show actual innocence and unlawful detention | State argues habeas is limited to facial invalidity of the judgment or lack of jurisdiction; most claims are trial‑error or sufficiency challenges not cognizable | Held: Majority—claims are not cognizable in habeas; petitioner failed to show facial invalidity or lack of jurisdiction; petition without probable cause |
| New evidence / actual innocence | Affidavits from accomplice and witnesses establish actual innocence | State: actual‑innocence claims equate to sufficiency/due‑process claims and are not a basis for habeas relief here | Held: Not cognizable in habeas; such claims should be raised on direct appeal or postconviction proceedings |
| Facial illegality: no conviction for underlying felony | McArthur asserts judgment is illegal because it did not separately convict him of aggravated robbery | State: At time of offense law did not permit separate convictions for capital murder and the underlying felony; judgment correctly reflects law then in effect | Held: Judgment is facially valid; sentence lawful; not a habeas basis |
| Right to a hearing / procedural relief | McArthur argues circuit court should have held an evidentiary hearing and defaulted State | State: No statutory requirement for a hearing absent probable cause; no default appropriate | Held: No hearing required where probable cause not shown; motion for default denied |
Key Cases Cited
- McArthur v. State, 309 Ark. 196, 830 S.W.2d 842 (Ark. 1992) (affirming McArthur’s direct conviction)
- Garrison v. Kelley, 2018 Ark. 8, 534 S.W.3d 136 (Ark. 2018) (standard for reviewing habeas decisions; pleading requirements)
- Philyaw v. Kelley, 2015 Ark. 465, 477 S.W.3d 503 (Ark. 2015) (habeas proper only when judgment invalid on its face or court lacked jurisdiction)
- Gardner v. Kelley, 2018 Ark. 300 (Ark. 2018) (habeas not a substitute for direct appeal; not for sufficiency challenges)
- Walker v. State, 353 Ark. 12, 110 S.W.3d 752 (Ark. 2003) (rule on convicting for capital murder and underlying felony changed prospectively)
- Stephenson v. Kelley, 2018 Ark. 143, 544 S.W.3d 44 (Ark. 2018) (actual‑innocence claims treated as sufficiency/due‑process claims not cognizable in habeas)
- Muldrow v. Kelley, 2018 Ark. 126, 542 S.W.3d 856 (Ark. 2018) (prosecutorial‑misconduct claims do not implicate facial validity or jurisdiction)