Legal Opinion

Buchte v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 27, 1999No. 98-01002PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Lavenski R. Smith, Justice.

Appellant, Daniel Buchte, appeals from a forty-five-day commitment order entered by a Pulaski County probate judge. Buchte contends that the commitment order was invalid because he did not appear nor was he represented at a probable-cause hearing as required by Ark. Code Ann. § 20-47-209 (Repl. 1991). The State acknowledges the invalidity of the forty-five-day commitment order. The State, however, requests we reverse and dismiss exclusively on the grounds that the Pulaski County probate court did not have jurisdiction to enter the order pursuant to our decision in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Campbell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993
  2. Chatman v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  3. Vier v. VierCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1998

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Babb v. MatlockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  2. Amant v. CallahanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  3. Burch v. GriffeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
  4. Adams v. Arkansas Department of Health & Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2009
  5. Doran v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2014

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API