Latest 3 Cases: Halliburton v. State (Criminal Law), Kitchell v. State (Criminal Law), Riley v. State (Criminal Law)

Which Laws Apply to Broker-Dealers? Federal Laws? State Laws? Both? General Principles Leading to an Answer

TAMAR FRANKEL

BU Law emerita professor Tamar Frankel explains the law of preemption as it pertains to broker-dealers and their investor clients. She predicts, among other things, that either the clients will demand that broker-dealers adhere to a fiduciary duty, or else that states will impose that duty on them.

Read More

Halliburton v. State

Citation: 2020 Ark. 101

Opinion Date: March 5, 2020

Judge: Karen R. Baker

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's conviction of first-degree murder and sentence of life imprisonment, holding that the circuit court did not err in the proceedings below. Specifically, the Court held that the circuit court (1) did not err in denying Defendant's motions for directed verdict; (2) did not err in denying Defendant's motion to suppress his custodial statement; (3) did not err in denying Defendant's motion for mistrial based on a prejudicial outburst from the witness stand; and (4) did not err in excluding the testimony of a witness that Defendant alleged would have pointed to someone else as the killer.

Kitchell v. State

Citation: 2020 Ark. 102

Opinion Date: March 5, 2020

Judge: Hudson

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the circuit court resentencing Defendant to life imprisonment after his original life-without-parole sentence was vacated due to Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), holding that the circuit court erred by allowing the jury to be informed of Defendant's prior sentence. Defendant pleaded guilty to capital murder and attempted capital murder and was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. After Miller was decided, the Supreme Court granted habeas relief and remanded to the circuit court for a sentencing hearing where Defendant could present Miller evidence for consideration. The circuit court held a resentencing trial, and the jury sentenced Defendant to life. On appeal, Defendant argued that the circuit court erred by permitting the jury to be informed that Defendant was previously sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded the case for a new sentencing trial, holding that the circuit court abused its discretion in not excluding this evidence pursuant to Ark. R. Crim. P. 403 and that the error was not harmless.

Riley v. State

Citation: 2020 Ark. 99

Opinion Date: March 5, 2020

Judge: Kemp

Areas of Law: Criminal Law

The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's convictions and sentence and granted Defendant's counsel's motion to withdraw, holding that no error occurred in the proceedings and that there were no nonfrivolous issues that supported an appeal in this case. Defendant was convicted of first-degree murder with a firearm and sentenced to life imprisonment. Defendant's counsel filed a motion to withdraw as counsel and a no-merit brief stating that there were no meritorious grounds to support an appeal. The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's convictions and granted counsel's motion to withdraw, holding (1) Defendant's appellate counsel demonstrated that any appeal would be frivolous and that this appeal had no merit; and (2) no prejudicial error occurred in the proceedings below.