Legal Opinion

Smith v. Fox

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided September 16, 2004No. CR 04-71PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tom Glaze, Justice.

This case comes before us as a petition tice. prohibition, or in the alternative, writ of certiorari or writ of mandamus. We are asked to decide whether a federal mental evaluation is sufficient to satisfy Arkansas’ statutory scheme governing such evaluations, found in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-305 (Supp. 2003). Procedurally, the State also questions whether the petitioner Tyree Smith has standing to obtain any one of the extraordinary writs he seeks from our court in deciding if the trial court erred in its interpretation and application of § 5-2-305. The State submits that…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Cave City Nursing Home, Inc. v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2002
  2. Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A. v. Richard's Honda YamahaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
  3. Camargo v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
  4. Conner v. SimesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2003
  5. Middleton v. LockhartSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. City of North Little Rock v. PfeiferSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2017
  2. Sandoval-Vega v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2011
  3. Bobo v. JonesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2006
  4. Pritchett v. SpicerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2017
  5. Thompson v. GuthrieSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2008

14 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