STEWART v. KELLEY, 5:15CV00158-DPM-JJV. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20151208998
Visitors: 30
Filed: Dec. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 07, 2015
Summary: ORDER JOE J. VOLPE , Magistrate Judge . In reviewing Mr. Stewart's claims, I find additional briefing on one point is necessary. At sentencing, the prosecutor apparently provided inaccurate argument to the jury that Mr. Stewart would only serve seventy percent of his sentence. (Doc. No. 16 at 518.) The trial court also appears to have incorrectly instructed the jury on this point. ( Id. at 505.) Mr. Stewart says this argument was inaccurate because, upon entering the ADC, prison officials
Summary: ORDER JOE J. VOLPE , Magistrate Judge . In reviewing Mr. Stewart's claims, I find additional briefing on one point is necessary. At sentencing, the prosecutor apparently provided inaccurate argument to the jury that Mr. Stewart would only serve seventy percent of his sentence. (Doc. No. 16 at 518.) The trial court also appears to have incorrectly instructed the jury on this point. ( Id. at 505.) Mr. Stewart says this argument was inaccurate because, upon entering the ADC, prison officials ..
More
ORDER
JOE J. VOLPE, Magistrate Judge.
In reviewing Mr. Stewart's claims, I find additional briefing on one point is necessary. At sentencing, the prosecutor apparently provided inaccurate argument to the jury that Mr. Stewart would only serve seventy percent of his sentence. (Doc. No. 16 at 518.) The trial court also appears to have incorrectly instructed the jury on this point. (Id. at 505.) Mr. Stewart says this argument was inaccurate because, upon entering the ADC, prison officials informed Mr. Stewart, based on his criminal history, he would be required to serve one hundred percent of his sentence. So the inaccurate argument and instruction potentially caused the jury to give him a harsher sentence.
It would be helpful for the parties to provide further briefing on this claim. I would like Respondent to address the merits of this claim by January 15, 2016. Petitioner may reply, if he chooses, by January 25, 2016.
Source: Leagle
