Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

Ark. Code Ann. § 16-91-204

Legislative intent

Known as the Arkansas Effective Death Penalty Act

The act spans §§ 16–16 (24 sections).

Applied in 5 court decisions — leading case Gibson v. Turpin (1999)

Most recently applied in Lee v. State (June 2006)

Acts 1997, No. 925, § 2.

How often courts cite this section

19982000200630
citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

It is the express intent of this subchapter to comply with the requirements of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, in an effort to obtain the benefits of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-132, concerning time limitations in which federal habeas corpus proceedings and appeals must be considered and decided, and for other purposes. Throughout this subchapter, references to “post-conviction” proceedings or petitions refer solely to those proceedings or petitions which are filed pursuant to the state rule or statute in which claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are cognizable, such as Rule 37 of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure. Specific reference to Rule 37 of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure was avoided only because the General Assembly is aware that the form of relief provided for by Rule 37 of the Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure may, at some point in the future, be provided for by a different rule or statute. It is the intent of the General Assembly to ensure that this subchapter apply to Rule 37-type post-conviction proceedings, not to post-conviction proceedings in which claims of ineffective assistance are not cognizable. It is the intent of § 16-91-202(e) to allow the appointment of counsel in the very limited circumstance in which, because of unique training, experience, or background, an attorney is clearly competent and qualified to represent an indigent petitioner in a capital post-conviction proceeding, but otherwise does not meet all of the criteria of § 16-91-202(c). Section 16-91-202(e) was created for the specific purpose of permitting the appointment of experienced attorneys, including but not limited to, former prosecutors and judges who, because of the nature of their practice, are uniquely qualified to represent capital defendants but do not meet the specific defense-related requirements of § 16-91-202(c).

Current official text: Arkansas General Assembly. Digitized from the UniCourt Code Improvement Commission public-domain capture. Reproduced from public-domain Arkansas statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.