In re Review of Habeas Corpus Proceedings
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Per curiam
In Fulks v. Walker, 224 Ark. 639, 275 S.W.2d 873 (1955), we recited the history resulting in the use of certiorari as the proper means of seeking review of habeas corpus proceedings. We concluded that appeal was more appropriate than certiorari, and we directed that henceforth review of habeas corpus proceedings would be by appeal.
In City of Clinton v. Jones, 302 Ark. 109, 787 S.W.2d 242 (1990), without reference to Fulks v. Walker, we said certiorari was the proper means of review of habeas corpus proceedings. We should not have done so. Since our decision in the City of Clinton case we have…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Fulks v. WalkerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
- City of Clinton v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
3Cited by6 opinions
- Davis v. ReedSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
- Waddle v. SargentSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993
- Cleveland v. FrazierSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
- Armstrong v. NorrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
- McClinton v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.