Heikkila v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Jim Hannah, Justice.
Jimmy Ray Heikkila appeals his conviction and sentence on two counts of incest. He was also convicted of rape, but he does not appeal that conviction. Heikkila alleges that the trial court erred in submitting the incest charges to the jury because he was accused of sexual intercourse or deviate sexual activity with his two nieces to whom he was related by affinity but not by consanguinity. Heikkila asserts that applying the rule that criminal statutes are strictly construed requires the conclusion that the alleged conduct with his nieces was not prohibited under the incest…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2002
- Boyd v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993
- Hales v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
- Graham v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993
- Hagar v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2000
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- United States v. DedmanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
- Paschal v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2012
- Arms. v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2015
- Graham v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2004
- State v. ArdoinSupreme Court of Louisiana · 2010
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.