Legal Opinion
Tumbs v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided October 27, 1986No. CR 86-124PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Robert H. Dudley, Justice.
Appellant was found guilty of violating the Omnibus DWI Act of 1983, and his sentence was enhanced because of three prior convictions. On appeal he contends the judgment should be reversed because: (1) There was no substantial evidence to prove that he was driving, and (2) two of his prior convictions were entered by the Municipal Court of Tyronza, a court which was defectively created. The case was certified to this Court by the Court of Appeals under Rule 29(l)(c). We affirm the conviction.
Appellant admits that he was intoxicated and was in one of two cars involved…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Norton v. Shelby CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- In Re SantillanesNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1943
- Cassell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1981
- Lang v. Mayor of BayonneSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1907
- Burt v. Winona & St. Peter RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Watson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1987
- Walker v. Arkansas Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1987