Legal Opinion

Coston v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided July 9, 1984No. CR 84-52PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Darrell Hickman, Justice.

The appellant’s convictions for first degreé battery and manufacturing a controlled substance with intent to deliver were affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Coston v. State, 10 Ark. App. 242, 663 S.W.2d. 187 (1984). Without seeking permission from this court, the appellant filed a petition for post-conviction relief in the trail court alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. After a hearing on the petition, the trial court denied relief. This is an appeal from that ruling.

We are dismissing the appeal because appellant failed to adhere to A.R.Cr.P., Rule 37.2(a),…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hayes v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
  2. Knappenberger v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
  3. Fink v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1983
  4. Mitchell v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1960
  5. Coston v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1984

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Jones v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
  2. Wilson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API