Legal Opinion · Dissent

Howard v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 27, 2002No. CR 00-803Published

1DissentJim Hannah, Justice

It is with great reluctance that I must dissent and argue that a jury verdict should be overturned. However, I am compelled to do so because the jury was left to speculation and conjecture which may not support a conviction. The demands of due process are not satisfied by suspicion, speculation, and conjecture.

This case was based entirely upon circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence can certainly constitute substantial evidence and support a jury’s verdict. However, requirements must be met that have not been discussed by the majority. Justice Butler in the case of Bowie v. State,…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Berger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  3. Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  4. Malinski v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  5. Wicks v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1980

30 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