Legal Opinion · Dissent

Standridge v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided December 11, 2014No. CR-13-15Published

1DissentJim Hannah, Chief Justice

_JjI respectfully dissent. Contrary to the majority’s assertions, the circuit court had subject-matter jurisdiction over the State’s case against Standridge because Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-15-207 (Repl. 2009) is criminal in nature.

Our caselaw is replete with the proposition that jurisdiction is the power of the court to hear and determine subject matter in controversy. Bliss v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 315, 2012 WL 3374058 (per curiam); Culbertson v. State, 2012 Ark. 112, 2012 WL 745303 (per curiam); Fudge v. Hobbs, 2012 Ark. 80, 2012 WL 579483; Anderson v. State, 2011 Ark. 35, 2011 WL…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Baker v. NorrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007
  2. Rosario v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
  3. Watkins v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API