Stewart v. State
2014 Ark. 419
| Ark. | 2014Background
- In 2011, Stewart was convicted by jury of raping J.H., who was mentally defective and under guardianship; J.H. was 23 but functioned at a first- or second-grade level.
- Stewart, a family friend, engaged in sexual intercourse with J.H. on at least one occasion, resulting in pregnancy and a paternity finding that Stewart was the father.
- Stewart was sentenced to 840 months’ imprisonment and the conviction was affirmed on direct appeal in Stewart v. State, 2012 Ark. 349.
- Stewart timely filed a pro se postconviction petition under Rule 37.1 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel; the trial court denied after a hearing.
- On appeal, Stewart asserts various ineffective-assistance claims including failure to call Amy Stewart, failure to pursue rape-shield evidence, failure to investigate, and failing to communicate a plea offer; the State defends for strategic reasons and lack of prejudice.
- The Court reiterates the Strickland standard: deficient performance plus reasonable probability of a different outcome, and emphasizes the need for prejudice and reasonable professional judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance standard applied | Stewart: counsel failures prejudiced defense under Strickland. | State: trial court properly applied Strickland and declined relief. | No reversible error; lack of prejudice shown. |
| Failure to pursue rape-shield objection and its prejudice | Amy Stewart testimony would have challenged J.H.'s credibility and consent claims. | No merit; rape-shield motion would not have changed outcome; strategy favored. | Strategy adequately supported; no prejudice established. |
| Failure to call expert/witnesses to contradict mental-defect evidence | Experts could rebut State’s portrayal of J.H.’s intellect and medication. | No specific experts identified; no proven prejudice. | Insufficient prejudice; decision within reasonable professional judgment. |
| Failure to communicate plea offer and document authenticity | A plea offer existed; counsel failed to convey it; document forgery argued. | Offer did not exist; document forged; witnesses credible; no reversible error. | No reversible error; lack of credible evidence of a valid offer. |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. Supreme Court (1984)) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance; performance and prejudice)
- Caery v. State, 2014 Ark. 247 (Ark. 2014) (clear erroneous standard; burden to show improper performance)
- Williams v. State, 369 Ark. 104 (Ark. 2007) (burden to overcome presumption of reasonable assistance)
- Holloway v. State, 2013 Ark. 140 (Ark. 2013) (prejudice required in ineffective-assistance claim)
- Abernathy v. State, 2012 Ark. 59 (Ark. 2012) (objective standard of reasonableness for counsel)
- Conley v. State, 2014 Ark. 172 (Ark. 2014) (motion meritlessness; Strickland standard application)
- Green v. State, 2014 Ark. 284 (Ark. 2014) (general assertions insufficient to show prejudice)