Greene v. State, 96-362

Decision Date14 October 1999
Docket Number96-362
CitationGreene v. State, 1 S.W.3d 442, 338 Ark. 806 (Ark. 1999)
PartiesJack Gordon GREENE v. STATE of Arkansas CR 96-362 ___ S.W.2d ___ Opinion delivered
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Certiorari, writ of -- granted -- trial court's findings affirmed. -- The supreme court granted a writ of certiorari for the purpose of accepting the record and for the further purpose of affirming the trial court's findings; because the trial court's findings were supported by a hearing transcript and the record, the trial court's findings were affirmed.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari; granted.

Mark Pryor, Att'y Gen., by: Brad Newman, Asst. Att'y Gen., for appellee/petitioner.

No response.

Per Curiam.

On October 15, 1992, Jack Gordon Greene was convicted in Johnson County Circuit Court of capital murder and was sentenced to death by lethal injection. On June 20, 1994, this court affirmed his conviction but reversed and remanded for resentencing. Greene v. State, 317 Ark. 350, 878 S.W.2d 384 (1994). On February 27, 1996, Greene was resentenced to death. After Greene indicated he wanted to waive his appeals, this court remanded the case on two separate occasions for hearings to determine Greene's competency to elect execution. Greene v. State, 326 Ark. 822, 933 S.W.2d 392 (1996) (per curiam); Greene v. State, 327 Ark. 511, 939 S.W.2d 834 (1997) (per curiam). On April 21, 1997, this court denied Greene's motion to dismiss his appeal and ordered that a briefing schedule be set. Greene v. State, 328 Ark. 218, 941 S.W.2d 428 (1997) (per curiam). On November 5, 1998, this court again reversed and remanded the case for resentencing. Greene v. State, 335 Ark. 1, 977 S.W.2d 192 (1998).

On July 1, 1999, Greene was resentenced to death. On July 2, 1999, Greene filed a waiver of appeal, and the trial court entered an order directing that Greene be evaluated by the Arkansas State Hospital for the purpose of determining whether he was competent to waive appellate and post-conviction review and to elect execution. Dr. Charles H. Mallory, Ph.D., and Dr. O. Wendell Hall, III, M.D., evaluated Greene and concluded that he was competent to elect between life and death and to knowingly and intelligently waive his appellate and post-conviction remedies.

On August 19, 1999, a hearing was held in Johnson County Circuit Court. After hearing testimony from Greene, Dr. Mallory, and Dr. Hall, the trial court concluded that Greene was competent to elect execution and to waive his right to appellate and post-conviction remedies. On August 20, 1999, the trial court entered an order which contained its findings:

1. Greene has the capacity to understand the choice between life and death.

2. Greene has the capacity to knowingly and intelligently waive any and all...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • Roberts v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 14 Febrero 2013
    ... ... He points to this court's decisions in the Greene and Robbins cases, claiming that in both instances, we allowed Greene         [426 S.W.3d 375]and Robbins to rescind their previously ... ...
  • Greene v. State
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 1 Febrero 2001
    ...JACK GORDON GREENE, APPELLANT, ... STATE OF ARKANSAS, APPELLEE ... No. CR 96-362 ... SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS ... Opinion Delivered: 1 February 2001 ... APPEAL FROM THE JOHNSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. CR-91-44, HON. JOHN S. PATTERSON, JUDGE, AFFIRMED ... ROBERT L. BROWN, Associate Justice ... This is the third appeal in this matter. In 1992, appellant Jack Gordon ... ...
  • Roberts v. State, CR 10–1068.
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 1 Diciembre 2011
    ... ... His primary authority for this proposition are the Greene cases. In State v. Greene, this court affirmed the circuit court's finding that Greene, who was sentenced to death, knowingly and intelligently ... ...