Arkansas Lawyers Advance Sheet Study Group
  • Main Page
  • Links
  • Continuing Legal Education
  • Members Only
  • Gerry's Blog
  • Advance Sheets Blog
  • Schedule
  • Case Summaries
  • Per Curiam Opinions
  • Videos

Arkansas Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, October 1 and October 2, 2014

10/2/2014

0 Comments

 
Mini reviews, week of 10-2-14

 

By Robert S. Tschiemer

www.tschiemerlegalbriefing.com

 

Klowski v. State, 2014 Ark. 403

          The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed a conviction of thirty-eight counts of distributing, possessing, or viewing matter depicting sexually explicit conduct involving a child, concluding the State did not have to prove he “knowingly” possessed it on his computer. A three-justice dissent read the statute differently.

http://opinions.aoc.arkansas.gov/WebLink8/0/doc/329083/Electronic.aspx

Butler v. Butler, 2014 Ark. App. 507

The Arkansas Court of Appeals affirmed a contempt ruling and rejected the argument that it was a non-final order because of an allowance of time to pay before the incarceration.

http://opinions.aoc.arkansas.gov/WebLink8/0/doc/329018/Electronic.aspx

Buckley v. State, 2014 Ark. App. 516

          The Arkansas Court of Appeals reversed a conviction for failure to appear and remanded, where the only evidence supporting the State’s charge was that his attorney testified she told him of the hearing date. Admission of this testimony violated the attorney-client privilege. A concurrence, by Judge Harrison, opined that Arkansas should provide for a “conduit” exception to third-party communications to an attorney who relays it to their client.

http://opinions.aoc.arkansas.gov/WebLink8/0/doc/329003/Electronic.aspx


Addition by Gerry Schulze

Sims v. DWS, 2014 Ark. App. 312

         The Arkansas Board of Review found that Sims was discharged from his job at Bismarck Public Schools for misconduct in connection with the work.  Sims appealed, and the Arkansas Court of Appeals reversed.  The Court found that reasonable minds could not conclude that the conduct alleged was sufficient to deny unemployment benefits.  There was no substantial evidence to support the board's finding.

          







 

0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Author

    Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.

    Archives

    October 2014
    September 2014

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.