Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dickinson v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided January 10, 2008No. 07-355Published

1DissentAnnabelle Clinton Imber, Justice

I respectfully, but strongly, disagree with the majority opinion. In dismissing the instant appeal as moot, the majority refuses to address an important issue: whether the right to counsel of persons sought to be involuntarily committed should be protected by the Anders procedures. Under our prior case law, the instant appeal fits squarely into both recognized exceptions to the mootness doctrine; thus, this case should be decided on its merits.

We have stated that the choice of mootness is ours to make. Owens v. Taylor, 299 Ark. 373, 772 S.W.2d 596 (1989). Where considerations of public…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Addington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Humphrey v. CadySupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Linker-Flores v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
  5. Campbell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993

7 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