Case Detail
CitationHoward v. State, 403 S.W.3d 38 (Ark. 2012)
Pros. First NameTom
Pros. Last NameCooper
Trial Year1999
BodySupreme court
OpinionAfter the Arkansas Supreme Court granted the defendant's "petition to reinvest jurisdiction in the trial court to consider the petition for a writ of error coram nobis" for apparent Brady violations where neither party was aware of the existence of notes outlining errors in laboratory evidence key to the State's case , the Arkansas Circuit Court for Little Rock County granted defendant a new trial: "The Court finds that there was no purposeful conduct by the State in withholding this information. Indeed it appears that neither party was aware of these reports prior to trial. However, pursuant to Brady, the State is imputed to have knowledge of these facts. The Court believes that had this information been available to the Petitioner at the time of trial that there is a reasonable probability that the result would have been different."
Determination Year2013
Misconduct TypeP
C/S EffectReversal of conviction
Pros. Misc. ReportedUKN
Sanction TypeUKN
Web link