{
  "id": 8717627,
  "name": "Earnest Lee WADE v. STATE of Arkansas",
  "name_abbreviation": "Wade v. State",
  "decision_date": "1986-01-21",
  "docket_number": "CR 79-19",
  "first_page": "94",
  "last_page": "95",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "288 Ark. 94"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "702 S.W.2d 28"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "639 S.W.2d 511",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.W.2d",
      "case_ids": [
        1750210
      ],
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/277/0128-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "277 Ark. 129",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1750168
      ],
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/277/0129-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "463 U.S. 745",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "U.S.",
      "case_ids": [
        6199647
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/us/463/0745-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "282 Ark. 246",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1740752
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1984,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/282/0246-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 212,
    "char_count": 2053,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.934,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.362280741160101e-07,
      "percentile": 0.9187014378058335
    },
    "sha256": "627e8d04cc972f20b5ba56a32f9d4aef677d498216659a509b94c95684300664",
    "simhash": "1:a36a38408a264a83",
    "word_count": 354
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:45:27.788923+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [
      "Purtle, J., not participating."
    ],
    "parties": [
      "Earnest Lee WADE v. STATE of Arkansas"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nEarnest Lee Wade was convicted of second degree escape and sentenced to ten years imprisonment and a $10,000 fine in Lincoln County Circuit Court. He was declared a pauper which entitles him to a record at state expense, and Betty Dickey was appointed to represent him on appeal. She has not yet filed a brief in his behalf. Wade asks that he be allowed to file a supplemental pro se brief, agreeing to fully comply with our rules on the form of such briefs.\nWade\u2019s motion is premature. Since he has not read his attorney\u2019s brief, he cannot say that it is deficient. If after reading the brief, Wade finds it inadequate, he may file a second motion to supplement. He should be aware, however, that unless he can clearly show that counsel\u2019s brief is lacking, he will not be permitted to file a supplemental brief.\nThere has to be an orderly procedure and consistent rules governing all legal petitions for relief, whether it be by a member of the bar, litigants representing themselves, or an inmate of a penal institution. In our judgment counsel is necessary to effectively represent a person charged with a serious criminal offense. If counsel is not obtainable because of indigence, it will be provided, both at trial and on appeal. Counsel is presumed competent. Watson v. State, 282 Ark. 246, 667 S.W.2d 953 (1984). That does not mean that counsel will argue every conceivable issue in a case or should present frivolous issues. It is a matter of good judgment how to present an appeal and legal counsel is best able to do that. Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745 (1983).\nUnder the proper circumstances we will allow individuals to represent themselves, but they receive no special consideration of their arguments. See Green v. State, 277 Ark. 129, 639 S.W.2d 511 (1982).\nMotion denied.\nPurtle, J., not participating.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Petitioner, pro se.",
      "Steve Clark, Att\u2019y Gen., by: Theodore Holder, Asst. Att\u2019y Gen., for respondent."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Earnest Lee WADE v. STATE of Arkansas\nCR 79-19\n702 S.W.2d 28\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered January 21, 1986\nPetitioner, pro se.\nSteve Clark, Att\u2019y Gen., by: Theodore Holder, Asst. Att\u2019y Gen., for respondent."
  },
  "file_name": "0094-01",
  "first_page_order": 120,
  "last_page_order": 121
}